pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock Creates First Silicon Alley Billionaire  (Read 24371 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ron

« Reply #25 on: June 29, 2013, 01:08 »
0
What seems odd is that iStock is meant to have the revenues of Shutterstock several times over but seems to be valued at less, taking account of the fact that it is also supposedly the little brother of Gettyimages.

As for the bitching, I guess Jon's main crime is that he had the wit to hang on to his creation and then float it as an IPO instead of grabbing a bag of cash from Getty or Corbis.
I guess 1 billion knocks 50 million out of the water any day ;-)



« Reply #26 on: June 29, 2013, 04:10 »
+2
What seems odd is that iStock is meant to have the revenues of Shutterstock several times over but seems to be valued at less, taking account of the fact that it is also supposedly the little brother of Gettyimages.

As for the bitching, I guess Jon's main crime is that he had the wit to hang on to his creation and then float it as an IPO instead of grabbing a bag of cash from Getty or Corbis.
I guess 1 billion knocks 50 million out of the water any day ;-)

Yeah, of course it isn't really a billion, though.  It's Wall Street fantasy cash. If he ordered his broker to sell all his shares on Monday he'd be lucky to get 10% of that. His real money is the cash he pocketed when he sold the 45%.

Similarly, if they add 10% to the artists' commission, the share price will probably collapse by 50% or so, because of the impact that would have on the company's earnings projections, so it's nonsense to want to link the commission rate to the share price.

What we get paid depends on what we will accept for our work. That applies to every site. If we want to insist on higher prices we simply don't supply sites that pay commissions below that level. Then you can sit at home, twiddle your thumbs and curse the scum who are destroying photography while watching your files not selling.

The main thing about SS is that it works. It's only sites that deliver the goods that people get worked up about and say are not paying enough. Who gives two hoots about Cutcaster? If you find a place that makes no money at all you don't complain about their rates but when a site is making you big bucks and you think another 10% would give you another $100 a month, then you get jealous over how much the owner is making and start agitating.

When a site is delivering a good return, don't try to break it.  And right now, it seems that every site except SS is broken as far as indes are concerned. It's going to account for about 50% of my total earnings this month.

Ron

« Reply #27 on: June 29, 2013, 04:30 »
0
I think there is a misunderstanding, I am not jealous of Jon. I cant even be jealous coz he is doing something I cant even copy or do myself. :) I am just a simple man with a day job and not savvy enough to create something like Jon did.  I know shares and commissions cant be linked, I specifically added smileys and a note to my comment to explain it was tongue in cheek.

« Reply #28 on: June 29, 2013, 04:54 »
+1
I think there is a misunderstanding, I am not jealous of Jon. I cant even be jealous coz he is doing something I cant even copy or do myself. :) I am just a simple man with a day job and not savvy enough to create something like Jon did.  I know shares and commissions cant be linked, I specifically added smileys and a note to my comment to explain it was tongue in cheek.
I wasn't quite sure what point you were making, I was just using your reply as a starting point to respond to a lot of different posts earlier in the thread.

BTW, did you see Sean Locke mentioned in some thread or other that he had more than 1,000 files at Pond 5 and had not made one sale in 15 days! Sean!!!  That seems to say something about the importance of the way sites market themselves and capture customer share and also about the price sensitivity of customers.
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 04:57 by BaldricksTrousers »

Ron

« Reply #29 on: June 29, 2013, 05:19 »
0
Ok, gotcha.

Yes, I saw that post and it made me realize P5 is not going to bring me any cash. So I am going to drop them.

« Reply #30 on: June 29, 2013, 05:27 »
+1
He also says he's getting two or three sales a day at Stocksy, where he also seems to have about 1,000 picture - image exclusive. Again, if that is what he is getting at his level then I doubt if Stocksy would be any good for me. It would probably be better to switch to doing exclusive RM for Alamy.

Actually, the way things are going, I might just cut back to SS and Alamy, with RF going to the first and RM to the other.

Ron

« Reply #31 on: June 29, 2013, 05:37 »
0
Well 2-3 sales a day, at Stocksy, is 10-150 dollar per day. 300-4500 dollar a month. Thats more then I make at SS, basically.

Tror

« Reply #32 on: June 29, 2013, 05:39 »
+3
I really don`t understand the People on this Forum getting hearts for brainwash marketing talk while others who demand a raise getting downrated. Whats wrong with those people? When a company we supply is doing well with the sale of our material we should get a raise. Pretty simple to me.

Ron

« Reply #33 on: June 29, 2013, 05:42 »
+1
Fanboys do that, just ignore it.

« Reply #34 on: June 29, 2013, 06:03 »
0
Well 2-3 sales a day, at Stocksy, is 10-150 dollar per day. 300-4500 dollar a month. Thats more then I make at SS, basically.

Yes but that's him. You'd probably have to knock two noughts off the tally to find the sort of return I would get .... maybe a sale a month. And that would be with 1,000 exclusive images, which would pretty well be a year's output for me - and working hard at it, at that!

« Reply #35 on: June 29, 2013, 06:40 »
+2
Give Jon a few more years and he can buy all of Getty with his pocket change.

He and his team all worked hard for their success, no rich family in the background to prop them up. So congrats and well deserved!

« Reply #36 on: June 29, 2013, 06:50 »
+2
I think there is a misunderstanding, I am not jealous of Jon. I cant even be jealous coz he is doing something I cant even copy or do myself. :) I am just a simple man with a day job and not savvy enough to create something like Jon did.  I know shares and commissions cant be linked, I specifically added smileys and a note to my comment to explain it was tongue in cheek.
I wasn't quite sure what point you were making, I was just using your reply as a starting point to respond to a lot of different posts earlier in the thread.

BTW, did you see Sean Locke mentioned in some thread or other that he had more than 1,000 files at Pond 5 and had not made one sale in 15 days! Sean!!!  That seems to say something about the importance of the way sites market themselves and capture customer share and also about the price sensitivity of customers.
He should have no problems selling video clips on Pond5.  I think they need at least a year to see if they can also sell stills.

« Reply #37 on: June 29, 2013, 07:50 »
+1
I really don`t understand the People on this Forum getting hearts for brainwash marketing talk while others who demand a raise getting downrated. Whats wrong with those people? When a company we supply is doing well with the sale of our material we should get a raise. Pretty simple to me.

best thing i've red here


WarrenPrice

« Reply #38 on: June 29, 2013, 08:28 »
-1
" But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother."

- George Orwell: "1984"


Yep never ending newspeak and doublethink.  One thing not mentioned in that article is the millions Jon made every year before going public.  He must have a nice stash besides the new billion.

The enforced wisdom of the thought police from the "SS thought crime enforcement brigade" is entertaining.

No one is ever going to brainwash me into thinking that .38 cents is sufficent return on investment for the type of images the micros asks us to produce to remain competative.  The return on investment is not sufficent, no matter how many copies they sell or the new markets they may break into.

Take a good look at the economies SS is entertaining and moving into. It is no coincidence that Jon is hosting dinners in Brazil and talking about Turkey in interviews. How low do you suppose submitters in the dark green zones would be willing to go?
 
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/gmaps.jsp


Why do you see success as a vice?


« Reply #39 on: June 29, 2013, 09:47 »
+4
he does even better than yuri, so now he is our new hero.

« Reply #40 on: June 29, 2013, 10:03 »
+10
I guess watching someone else make a lot of money from my photos is the next best thing to doing it myself.     I know that every coffee grower in Guatamala has a framed  photo of Howard Shultz hanging in his home.   So why am I not excited... 

« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 10:19 by stockastic »

« Reply #41 on: June 29, 2013, 10:20 »
+6
" But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother."

- George Orwell: "1984"


Yep never ending newspeak and doublethink.  One thing not mentioned in that article is the millions Jon made every year before going public.  He must have a nice stash besides the new billion.

The enforced wisdom of the thought police from the "SS thought crime enforcement brigade" is entertaining.

No one is ever going to brainwash me into thinking that .38 cents is sufficent return on investment for the type of images the micros asks us to produce to remain competative.  The return on investment is not sufficent, no matter how many copies they sell or the new markets they may break into.

Take a good look at the economies SS is entertaining and moving into. It is no coincidence that Jon is hosting dinners in Brazil and talking about Turkey in interviews. How low do you suppose submitters in the dark green zones would be willing to go?
 
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/gmaps.jsp


Why do you see success as a vice?


I don't see success as a vice, my father has a very large company of his own. He did not build it by exploiting suppliers or employees. The corp pay's fair $$$$$ to those who helped it succeed. While the company brings in more revenue than SS they have not pocketed as much, they return a larger % to those who helped them get there.

He could have gone public to pocket more money, but he chose not to because he knew what it would do to the people who helped him get there. How much money does any one person need to be secure, happy, content?


PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #42 on: June 29, 2013, 10:31 »
0
I guess watching someone else make a lot of money from my photos is the next best thing to doing it myself.     I know that every coffee grower in Guatamala has a framed  photo of Howard Shultz hanging in his home.   So why am I not excited...

Probably because he used your images to make himself a billionaire and you're most likely still working hard to barely get by.

The only things that prevent any of us from being another Jon Oringer are ability and willingness. 
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 10:35 by PaulieWalnuts »

« Reply #43 on: June 29, 2013, 10:38 »
0
The only things that prevent any of us from being another Jon Oringer are ability and willingness.

Now that really IS the best quote for ages.

I do wonder how much people think SS has "pocketed", what its actual percentage profit on turnover is ... and how that compares with Balex's dad's company.

WarrenPrice

« Reply #44 on: June 29, 2013, 10:43 »
-1
" But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother."

- George Orwell: "1984"


Yep never ending newspeak and doublethink.  One thing not mentioned in that article is the millions Jon made every year before going public.  He must have a nice stash besides the new billion.

The enforced wisdom of the thought police from the "SS thought crime enforcement brigade" is entertaining.

No one is ever going to brainwash me into thinking that .38 cents is sufficent return on investment for the type of images the micros asks us to produce to remain competative.  The return on investment is not sufficent, no matter how many copies they sell or the new markets they may break into.

Take a good look at the economies SS is entertaining and moving into. It is no coincidence that Jon is hosting dinners in Brazil and talking about Turkey in interviews. How low do you suppose submitters in the dark green zones would be willing to go?
 
http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/gmaps.jsp


Why do you see success as a vice?


I don't see success as a vice, my father has a very large company of his own. He did not build it by exploiting suppliers or employees. The corp pay's fair $$$$$ to those who helped it succeed. While the company brings in more revenue than SS they have not pocketed as much, they return a larger % to those who helped them get there.

He could have gone public to pocket more money, but he chose not to because he knew what it would do to the people who helped him get there. How much money does any one person need to be secure, happy, content?


Certainly not going to debate your dad's success.  Just trying to understand the hate you express for Shutterstock. 
I'm not sure how anyone could be involved in Microstock and not respect shutterstock.
Is there an agency that you would recommend?

« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 10:45 by WarrenPrice »

« Reply #45 on: June 29, 2013, 10:55 »
+1
Asking a company to pay a fair royalty and maintain their site so that we are able to bring reasonable returns on our investments does not equal hate.

Why is it unreasonable to expect a fair and functional marketplace from a successful company?

WarrenPrice

« Reply #46 on: June 29, 2013, 10:59 »
0
Asking a company to pay a fair royalty and maintain their site so that we are able to bring reasonable returns on our investments does not equal hate.

Why is it unreasonable to expect a fair and functional marketplace from a successful company?

Not unreasonable.  Where do we get that?

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #47 on: June 29, 2013, 11:01 »
+3
I don't hate Shutterstock. In fact, I think it's the best microstock company out there. But being all happy for Jon because he hits the 1B $ mark is a bit silly while we contributors still make pennies for each download. Jon Oringer is not a hero or a god or a friend, so I couln't really care any less, as long as I make some money off of this.

« Reply #48 on: June 29, 2013, 11:07 »
0
I don't hate Shutterstock. In fact, I think it's the best microstock company out there. But being all happy for Jon because he hits the 1B $ mark is a bit silly while we contributors still make pennies for each download. Jon Oringer is not a hero or a god or a friend, so I couln't really care any less, as long as I make some money off of this.

like others said in this topic, build your own site and wealth, I really don't think we can complain looking at ALL other agencies, would you have a reason to continue doing microstock without SS at this exact moment?

« Reply #49 on: June 29, 2013, 11:11 »
+3
I'm not sure how anyone could be involved in Microstock and not respect shutterstock.

"Respect", sure.  It's a success, and an interesting high-tech company. It offers photographers stability in the form of a fairly reliable marketing channel.  Jon Oringer seems to have made money by honest effort, and might be the nicest guy in the world.  Maybe, like Bill Gates, he'll go on to use his money to do good things.

But I don't see why I should be personally thrilled about this success.  The formula has been to force suppliers' prices below the floor, to the point where it's hardly worth continuing.  His company now controls a huge part of the market, and competitors paying much more to contributors are being forced out, and the barrier to entry is colossal.  Some posters here seem to believe this was the only possible outcome, and that therefor we should rejoice in it, and enjoy Oringer's success vicariously.   

It's been said that people the ultra rich to office in the belief that this will somehow make them richer themselves.   I don't see that we're participating greatly in the success of Shutterstock; our position is more like the small scale coffee growers that find they can only sell to a couple of big middlemen, at subsistence prices, with no hope of a better deal in the future.

Sorry but I won't be getting in the line to wax "Jon's" BMW this weekend. 
« Last Edit: June 29, 2013, 11:20 by stockastic »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
2406 Views
Last post January 19, 2010, 10:38
by donding
4 Replies
3343 Views
Last post August 27, 2012, 16:40
by leaf
1 Replies
2435 Views
Last post June 29, 2013, 13:22
by cathyslife
0 Replies
1952 Views
Last post June 20, 2016, 17:28
by increasingdifficulty
19 Replies
819 Views
Last post December 04, 2021, 05:18
by Justanotherphotographer

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle