pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

Will you continue ss boycott on jun 22-28 period?

For sure
86 (86.9%)
No
13 (13.1%)

Total Members Voted: 98

Voting closed: June 24, 2020, 02:43

Author Topic: Shutterstock blackout, 2nd phase: JUN 22-28  (Read 4355 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: June 16, 2020, 12:02 »
+14
Jo Ann Snover doesn't need any more things to do!! :)

https://twitter.com/joannsnover/status/1272934303807098881

It would be really great to have the collection size waaaay down when they close their books on Q2 2020

Then Stan Pavlovsky would have more explaining to do in the earnings call...

Edited Jun 17

I'd like to emphasize (sorry for the color, but it will perhaps catch someone's eye) how much of a difference it would make if we can keep the collection size low through June 30, 2020

For those of you who can, another week and a bit (beyond the planned one week) would mean we could get our action in writing in their "Key operating metrics" section of the report. The collection size and percentage growth are in every quarterly report

Take a look at the numbers for 2017 - Q1 2020. It's natural the percentage growth will slow as the collection balloons (image spam much??), but imagine how striking it would be to see a 13% or 14% growth rate. The lowest previous report 2017-19 was 30%, Q1 this year was 27%

2017

63%, 57%, 52%, 46%

2018

42%, 41%, 42%, 42%

2019

39%, 37%, 34%, 30%

If we can hold the collection down to 320 million, it'd be 14% growth (they do it over the same quarter previous year, so Q2 2019 in our case; the comparison is 280 million images). That would be about half the previous lowest growth...

It might even be possible to contact analysts to get them to ask about it, but I'm not sure about being able to do that
« Last Edit: June 17, 2020, 19:59 by Jo Ann Snover »


« Reply #26 on: June 16, 2020, 12:46 »
+2
Peeps don't forget to add your link in SS profile so people can find your work elsewhere. Also create a gmail (or other email service) address with your real or contributor name to use as contact address.

If you don't have a website for your microstock profile then you can create one for free at Wix. (geez I sound like a commercial)
Any free service will do of course but I took Wix because it seems to be integrated with Shutterstock and since the purpose of this website is to steer away from SS I find this quite amusing  ;D
We are all creatives/designers so it shouldn't be too difficult to set up a quick website.

Also for anyone who doesn't have time or is a little intimidated by setting up an actual site you could go the route of just making yourself a profile page with links to your work on a service like https://about.me/ or https://linktr.ee/ (Both have free versions last I checked.)  They are really easy to set up even with zero tech skills or patience :)

whtvr2

« Reply #27 on: June 16, 2020, 12:58 »
+1
It is not wise to suggest free sites or free services. No client will ever browse or take serious someone selling work online but not paying for hosting. Plus website developers also need to get jobs and got payed  ::)

« Reply #28 on: June 16, 2020, 13:22 »
+2
Adobe Portfolio or Behance

« Reply #29 on: June 16, 2020, 14:13 »
+3
It is not wise to suggest free sites or free services. No client will ever browse or take serious someone selling work online but not paying for hosting. Plus website developers also need to get jobs and got payed  ::)

I was only suggesting a temporary solution for contributors who might not currently have the time or budget to build a website to get their links out quickly.  As a web designer myself very I'm well aware that people get paid to build sites.

It's a pretty big stretch to say "no client ever" will click on those links. In my experience clients absolutely will click on a link and contact you if they are really interested in your work. 

« Reply #30 on: June 16, 2020, 15:25 »
+6
Um, I am not reactiviating my portfolio at all.  None of this 1-week stuff.  That won't do a thing to SS.  They need to be hit hard and choked of content permanently. For those doing a temporary closure, that does not help with the long-term impact we're looking to achieve.  All SS does is wait a week.  Bang. Images reactivated.  No, we need to strangle them of really well done, salable content to the point where their stock price falls significantly (and remains weak), Investors flee, the board removes Stan, and nobody wants to buy SS if they go up for sale.  That takes discipline and commitment.


Im with you. Its the same old, same old abusive relationship thing. They crap up the site with similars, garbage and stolen work, so most contributors cant even get a fair shake. Then they cut commissions. So people get fed up and stand up to them. So then, what, they maybe apologize and say just kidding and everybody runs back? Nope. I dont work with those kind of business ethics. My images are gone!


Besides, I will be very surprised if they walk back their stance. They have shareholders to keep happy, and they cant pay fair commissions and pay shareholders too. I have read speculation that they might be doing a pump and dump. That seems highly possible, too.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2020, 15:35 by FastRacer »

angelawaye

  • Eat, Sleep, Keyword. Repeat

« Reply #31 on: June 16, 2020, 18:15 »
+6
I turned my portfolio off May 31 and it stays off until I see something positive happen - perhaps the old rates plus a tier or two above the previous maximums?
Same. I'm never turning it back on at the current rates.

« Reply #32 on: June 16, 2020, 23:28 »
+1
I still can't understand why some people are so fixated with $0.10 downloads.

For years I've been selling images on iStock for as little as $0.02 and as high as $20.00.

I presume those that are unhappy put too much emphasis on Shutterstock rather than spreading their assets among many agencies.

How about ranking reset every year?
It looks like you don't have basic self-respect.


you have NO IDEA of my strategic imperatives  -- keep to comments that reflect real info

whtvr2

« Reply #33 on: June 17, 2020, 02:08 »
0
It is not wise to suggest free sites or free services. No client will ever browse or take serious someone selling work online but not paying for hosting. Plus website developers also need to get jobs and got payed  ::)

I was only suggesting a temporary solution for contributors who might not currently have the time or budget to build a website to get their links out quickly.  As a web designer myself very I'm well aware that people get paid to build sites.

It's a pretty big stretch to say "no client ever" will click on those links. In my experience clients absolutely will click on a link and contact you if they are really interested in your work.

Making a site is easy. You missed the "pay someone to make it professional part". Anyway, there are individuals out there selling in clean professional sites. I wouldn't dare to present a my-cool-portfolio-freewebsite-because-i-dont-wanna-pay-50bucks-someone-dot-whatever plus a possible addition ad banner from Freepik or Shutterstock.

And as long as we speak for principles. I wouldn't ever made a site to a hist providing free imagery to their clients.

But again you are right. Clients do shop around the internet. Depending the client maybe will follow links and buy, maybe will download and crop watermark to use.

« Reply #34 on: June 17, 2020, 03:29 »
+3
I still can't understand why some people are so fixated with $0.10 downloads.

For years I've been selling images on iStock for as little as $0.02 and as high as $20.00.

I presume those that are unhappy put too much emphasis on Shutterstock rather than spreading their assets among many agencies.

How about ranking reset every year?
It looks like you don't have basic self-respect.


you have NO IDEA of my strategic imperatives  -- keep to comments that reflect real info

Woha you donating almost 50.000 of imagery, nice one.They should thank you)))

« Reply #35 on: June 17, 2020, 04:54 »
0
I still can't understand why some people are so fixated with $0.10 downloads.

For years I've been selling images on iStock for as little as $0.02 and as high as $20.00.

I presume those that are unhappy put too much emphasis on Shutterstock rather than spreading their assets among many agencies.

How about ranking reset every year?
It looks like you don't have basic self-respect.


you have NO IDEA of my strategic imperatives  -- keep to comments that reflect real info

Woha you donating almost 50.000 of imagery, nice one.They should thank you)))

Don't bother, I was going to reply but it's not even worth the effort. Well I will make a small effort.
Like I said before these groupies are making up all kinds of excuses (and expensive words) to justify their commitment to SS even though they know they are getting scrwd six ways from sunday. Who needs a reality check here?
In fact the more they upload the better for us since buyers will start to notice the lack of quality more quickly and this will in turn make it easier for them to switch stores.

If these people have no issue with selling at 0,10c then it means they believe their work is of such low quality that it's only worth 0,10c which is fine by me and I believe them.

Mind you that I am not talking about the people out there who are very much against SS recent change and would like to take action but just can't afford it, especially during these difficult times. It's the groupies who are all for it I'm referring to.
« Last Edit: June 17, 2020, 05:44 by Snow »

« Reply #36 on: June 17, 2020, 06:25 »
+1

Could it really block their servers?
We all agree to reactivate our portfolios at the same time (we decide on a GMT time that is convenient for most of us - 17.00 GMT [?])
Then two days later we deactivate our portfolios in the same way.
And we continue like this every two days

It's surely set up on a queue or cron sort of action to only process so many at a time. If I were to build it it would just be a single bool column "available" or something but, I doubt simply enabling or re-enabling is enough to cause much server stress. (since that would be a problem they'd surely have had to address already when receiving their umpteen million pictures per day.)

« Reply #37 on: June 17, 2020, 06:30 »
+3
I still can't understand why some people are so fixated with $0.10 downloads.

For years I've been selling images on iStock for as little as $0.02 and as high as $20.00.

I presume those that are unhappy put too much emphasis on Shutterstock rather than spreading their assets among many agencies.

Because, each of my stupid little things takes at minimum 20 seconds just for upload, and max on the flags for instance, about a day. I'm not on iStock either and quite frankly, them and SS can go fuck themselves ...


« Reply #39 on: June 19, 2020, 01:48 »
+6
After 13 years of SS the time has come to say goodbye. Can somebody tell me how to delete pictures on SS? Clearly, i removed all my images arranged and sorted under the catalog manager. That was the easy part. But there is more ... How can i delete those files not included in my catalog manager selections? Tips are highly appreciated. Thanks!

« Reply #40 on: June 19, 2020, 01:51 »
+2
I turned my portfolio off May 31 and it stays off until I see something positive happen - perhaps the old rates plus a tier or two above the previous maximums?
Same. I'm never turning it back on at the current rates.

Same here too.

I'm done with SS unless they take some major, reliable steps to regain my trust.

« Reply #41 on: June 20, 2020, 16:36 »
+1
I have a few photos that rank at the top of searches that I would like to disable.  However, I'm concerned about losing my ranking once the photos are enabled again.  Does anyone know what would happen?  Thanks.


« Reply #42 on: June 21, 2020, 03:31 »
0
I have a few photos that rank at the top of searches that I would like to disable.  However, I'm concerned about losing my ranking once the photos are enabled again.  Does anyone know what would happen?  Thanks.

Don't care.

« Reply #43 on: June 21, 2020, 03:41 »
+3
I disabled my account as well!

« Reply #44 on: June 21, 2020, 03:47 »
0
I have a few photos that rank at the top of searches that I would like to disable.  However, I'm concerned about losing my ranking once the photos are enabled again.  Does anyone know what would happen?  Thanks.

If you disable your portfolio then re-activate your image ranking appears to stay as it was

Though I would say the longer you leave it de-activated it may affect ranking.


« Reply #45 on: June 21, 2020, 07:13 »
+8
I deleted my images. SS just isnt worth the hassle anymore. #boycottShutterstock

« Reply #46 on: June 25, 2020, 03:11 »
+1
They begin to delete contributor icons with striked out 10c pictures and clearing description field about royalties drop.
Put everyting back, two ports.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2020, 03:13 by NeonRobot »

« Reply #47 on: June 25, 2020, 05:56 »
+1
I have a few photos that rank at the top of searches that I would like to disable.  However, I'm concerned about losing my ranking once the photos are enabled again.  Does anyone know what would happen?  Thanks.
If your intention from the beginning on was only a temporarily deactivation of your portfolio, better reactivate immediately, and accept selling the majority of your work at 10$c.
These few weeks of boycot aren't gonna change anything. This is the new normal at SS.

As I see it, there are two options: accept it and take the pennies, or quit them and don't look back.

« Reply #48 on: June 25, 2020, 06:37 »
0
I have a few photos that rank at the top of searches that I would like to disable.  However, I'm concerned about losing my ranking once the photos are enabled again.  Does anyone know what would happen?  Thanks.
If your intention from the beginning on was only a temporarily deactivation of your portfolio, better reactivate immediately, and accept selling the majority of your work at 10$c.
These few weeks of boycot aren't gonna change anything. This is the new normal at SS.

As I see it, there are two options: accept it and take the pennies, or quit them and don't look back.
i don't agree...they are trying to scare people doing this,but i'm sure that if you ask to reactivate the account they will do it in a bit...they are angry of contributors and new content...

« Reply #49 on: June 26, 2020, 06:45 »
0
As I see it, there are two options: accept it and take the pennies, or quit them and don't look back.
There's a people who see other options. If you like it or not. And you are not helping them.
Let's keep united. Let's let everybody do his part as hard as he can.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
4126 Views
Last post May 01, 2007, 09:22
by sharply_done
14 Replies
2570 Views
Last post November 30, 2019, 14:44
by Reckless
4 Replies
1088 Views
Last post June 12, 2020, 02:27
by cathyslife
27 Replies
3018 Views
Last post June 27, 2020, 16:38
by noodle
39 Replies
2166 Views
Last post Today at 03:08
by NeonRobot

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle