MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock raised image price by 20 cents. No raise for contributors?  (Read 11020 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Semmick Photo

« on: April 16, 2015, 08:38 »
+17
Not claiming anything to be fact but if I compare these prices to what I still see

199 euro for 750 month = 0.27 c/i
165 euro for 350 month = 0.47 c/i

Shutterstock gave themselves a 20 cent raise per image. And nuttin' for us. So it seems.

New pricing?



Old pricing


« Reply #1 on: April 16, 2015, 08:50 »
-2
Here we have it.....the start of a new price war.........

« Reply #2 on: April 16, 2015, 08:53 »
+7
No raise for contributors?

Nope, I didn't notice any in my stats. At least not in last few (almost 8 ) years...
(getting next level is another thing).

_______
nuttin' - haha, I didn't know that, good one!  ;)
« Last Edit: April 16, 2015, 08:56 by Ariene »

shudderstok

« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2015, 09:18 »
+9
i guess they need to keep the people that matter and give them a raise - shareholders - besides, SS already knows you will accept pennies for a download so why would they give you a raise?
« Last Edit: April 16, 2015, 11:08 by shudderstok »

Semmick Photo

« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2015, 12:48 »
+6
Here we have it.....the start of a new price war.........
But the prices went up, not down.

« Reply #5 on: April 16, 2015, 15:12 »
+3
Here we have it.....the start of a new price war.........
But the prices went up, not down.

BEST VALUE
Professional
Download 350 images every month, including access to all JPEG and Vector sizes

US$ 169
per month
1 Year
Save
US$ 394

no more 750 a month plan ? That's why 25 a day went away, it would have been 12 a day. When do we get the raise.

objowl

« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2015, 15:43 »
0
I think that they are probably saving the raise until my birthday, can you wait until October.  ;D

« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2015, 16:21 »
+8
This is what I'm seeing here:

Get access to our entire collection with no daily download limits.

750 Images Per Month
1 Year $199/month
1 Month $249/month

350 Images Per Month
1 Month $169/month

Their are reducing their "risk" of a client buying all 750 images, so they figured out a way to screw us silently. On the other hand, it will be more attractive to smaller buyers - which will increase downloads but also reduce OD packs. All in all, really bad news. They are increasing their profit margin while reducing our % royalties.

« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2015, 16:39 »
+15
How was it going? "upload more so maybe sales will come..." ?

Sad, how hard it is to be fair with people who bring them money today. Artist is just a robot and his only one option seems to be "work more so maybe..."

Sorry, but it's not easy to be positive lately.
 ::) :-\ >:(

Uncle Pete

« Reply #9 on: April 16, 2015, 16:40 »
+1
Here's what I see:



Both plans are offered.



Here we have it.....the start of a new price war.........
But the prices went up, not down.


BEST VALUE
Professional
Download 350 images every month, including access to all JPEG and Vector sizes

US$ 169
per month
1 Year
Save
US$ 394

no more 750 a month plan ? That's why 25 a day went away, it would have been 12 a day. When do we get the raise.

« Reply #10 on: April 16, 2015, 18:26 »
+28
I see the same display as Uncle Pete.

With the new option, they get - assuming a buyer downloads all 350 - 48.28 cents per image and pay me 38 cents. For the first time they make a profit, guaranteed, on every sale.

With the older 750 a month plan, they run the risk of losing money (even though it clearly doesn't happen with most buyers) as they receive 33.2 cents an image on the one month deal and 26.53 cents an image on the yearly package.

At a bare minimum, they should have communicated with contributors about this up front.

And also at a bare minimum, they should increase our royalties on the 350 a month subs even if they leave them alone on other products.

They've trumpeted that they're a technology company and shown themselves good at site updates without breakage (mostly), so they shouldn't find that hard to accomplish.

Back in the day when they gave us raises, they would increase prices, wait a month or two to see how buyers behaved and then set the royalties they paid us. It'd be reasonable for them to do the same here. I can wait a month or two for them to figure buyer behavior out.

I think the risk of a buyer downloading all 350 is higher with this product than with the 750-a-month product, but I'm guessing many buyers will still leave a few on the table. The smaller the bundle and the looser the terms (i.e. having one monthly limit versus daily ones), the greater the likelihood of a buyer using up all their allotment.

But even so they can afford to pay the top tier 45 cents instead of 38 on those $169 a month packages.

Rinderart

« Reply #11 on: April 16, 2015, 20:05 »
+4
This sub Business was based entirely on Insurance co actuary Tables. If everyone that pays for health insurance got sick. that business would fail almost instantly.

ultimagina

« Reply #12 on: April 16, 2015, 21:18 »
+1
This sub Business was based entirely on Insurance co actuary Tables. If everyone that pays for health insurance got sick. that business would fail almost instantly.

Or banking, if everyone would want withdrawals the same day.
Or telecom, if everyone would want to make a phone call at the same time.
Or many other businesses
« Last Edit: April 16, 2015, 21:20 by ultimagaina »

« Reply #13 on: April 16, 2015, 23:59 »
+19
This is a really bad move from them against us contributors. Cutting our already low commission like this ain't that nice move. It cuts the downloads, but we still get the same crappy .38$. If I can't get the bills paid, then I'll go for another work and stop uploading. Is that what you want SS? Less high quality images? Wake up!

« Reply #14 on: April 17, 2015, 02:23 »
+13
This is a really bad move from them against us contributors. Cutting our already low commission like this ain't that nice move. It cuts the downloads, but we still get the same crappy .38$. If I can't get the bills paid, then I'll go for another work and stop uploading. Is that what you want SS? Less high quality images? Wake up!

I'm affraid I must worry you - they (SS) don't read this forum. I asked them many times to wake up, change their mind, etc, never got any respond. You/ we are talking to the empty wall only.

But, the nature doesn't like emptyness. If there is a hole it should be filled. It's time for some new model agency to build a really great platform for contributors. Fair pricing, respect for our work, ... The place where we could find happy clients with happy artists. I'm affraid it would have to be exclusive (something like Stocksy, but opened widely, so everyone could love it and use it).

OM

« Reply #15 on: April 17, 2015, 02:35 »
+11
Can't help correlating this change in subs packages with a reduction in downloads and, more importantly, a dearth of ODDs on which most contributors are dependent to make a decent month's payout. Will have to wait and see whether there is correlation or just coincidence. Not too optimistic though looking at April so far.

« Reply #16 on: April 17, 2015, 04:18 »
0
Maybe there is a payrise planned?


Semmick Photo

« Reply #17 on: April 17, 2015, 04:21 »
+5
Maybe there is a payrise planned?
Lets hope so. As Jo Ann mentioned, maybe in a few months.

« Reply #18 on: April 17, 2015, 04:43 »
+5
Raises at Shutterstock have been rolled out at the beginning of March. It is long past time (2008) and moral is at all time lows.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5591&highlight=submitter#5591

OM

« Reply #19 on: April 17, 2015, 05:18 »
+1
Maybe there is a payrise planned?
Lets hope so. As Jo Ann mentioned, maybe in a few months.

Not going to make a huge difference if dls/ODDs&SODs decrease more! Get 10% price increase but lose 30% of dls. especially in ODDs where it hurts most.

« Reply #20 on: April 17, 2015, 05:52 »
+1
Just in case, I don't see any difference in ODs. But subs drop veeery much down and SoDs hit zero this month. So only ODs stay at the same level.

« Reply #21 on: April 17, 2015, 07:28 »
+15
Can't help correlating this change in subs packages with a reduction in downloads and, more importantly, a dearth of ODDs on which most contributors are dependent to make a decent month's payout. Will have to wait and see whether there is correlation or just coincidence. Not too optimistic though looking at April so far.

Completely agree.  Far to coincidental. Severe drop in sub downloads and ZERO EL's in last 8 weeks, very few OD's. This is it folks. SS is gone to the dark side, making it next to impossible for MOST (NOT ALL) to make an sustainable income there. Remember, fewer downloads does not mean they aren't raking in the doe.

« Reply #22 on: April 17, 2015, 11:06 »
0


Back in the day when they gave us raises, they would increase prices, wait a month or two to see how buyers behaved and then set the royalties they paid us. It'd be reasonable for them to do the same here. I can wait a month or two for them to figure buyer behavior out.



Im not sure and I may be wrong but at that time, haven't they announce that we will be seeing a raise in advance and then took that time to figure out how much will that rise be ?
 

« Reply #23 on: April 17, 2015, 11:26 »
+11
There will be a raise.  For SHAREHOLDERS. Not for contributors.

To the people who thought SS would never screw contributors - Welcome to the inevitable, otherwise known as reality.

« Reply #24 on: April 17, 2015, 11:29 »
+1


Back in the day when they gave us raises, they would increase prices, wait a month or two to see how buyers behaved and then set the royalties they paid us. It'd be reasonable for them to do the same here. I can wait a month or two for them to figure buyer behavior out.



Im not sure and I may be wrong but at that time, haven't they announce that we will be seeing a raise in advance and then took that time to figure out how much will that rise be ?

I don't think they did. But however it worked, the increase was annouced two or three months after the change. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed.

OM

« Reply #25 on: April 17, 2015, 12:17 »
+10
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(

« Reply #26 on: April 17, 2015, 13:18 »
0
There will be a raise.  For SHAREHOLDERS. Not for contributors.

To the people who thought SS would never screw contributors - Welcome to the inevitable, otherwise known as reality.

picture this from resident evil where the bad dude is on the top of the bldg when annie kicks him out of the chopper . then the eagle eye shot of all those zombies / infected humans come on him and ate him .
soon, there will be a movie similar to that based on microstocker and oringer  ;D


Semmick Photo

« Reply #27 on: April 17, 2015, 13:19 »
+8
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

« Reply #28 on: April 17, 2015, 13:26 »
+1
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?

« Reply #29 on: April 17, 2015, 13:30 »
+2
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?

Given that it is publicly traded, you could buy shares.  ::)

Semmick Photo

« Reply #30 on: April 17, 2015, 13:44 »
+13
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?
I closed several accounts and started my own site selling direct. What about you?

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #31 on: April 17, 2015, 17:03 »
+4
I was already wondering why subs were drying up and ODD's were nowhere to be founds these last few weeks. As if things couldn't get worse in microstock already. 

I think microstock is going to be very, very different, 3 years from now...

OM

« Reply #32 on: April 17, 2015, 18:20 »
+3
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?

Given that it is publicly traded, you could buy shares.  ::)

And contribute to the biggest Ponzi on the planet...Wall Street....no thanks!  ;)

« Reply #33 on: April 17, 2015, 20:03 »
+13
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?
To me the handwriting on the wall was when SS put a link on the Shutterstock landing page to send customers to OFFSET, where I was not allowed to contribute. That signaled a change - the SS I used to love - the one my images earned 6 figures in revenue for -  was gone. I quit creating images for microstock then and have moved on to other things.

« Reply #34 on: April 17, 2015, 20:15 »
+3
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?

Given that it is publicly traded, you could buy shares.  ::)

And contribute to the biggest Ponzi on the planet...Wall Street....no thanks!  ;)

Always amazes me when people complain about how these corporations have no priority except making shareholders rich but then refuse to become a shareholder. Which is it? Huge amounts of profit being funneled away from contributors? Or a risky scheme where you end up with nothing?

Stay a victim. Beg for handouts from the mothercorp. Blame 'them' for keeping you down.

Enjoy the ride.

« Reply #35 on: April 18, 2015, 01:55 »
+1
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?
I closed several accounts and started my own site selling direct. What about you?

You closed your shutterstock account? No, of course you didnt...  ::)

(This thread is about SS. You should know, you started it.)


« Reply #36 on: April 18, 2015, 02:57 »
+12
Its sad that SS, that was long seen as positive and contributor-friendly, seems to have trudged away in a different direction. First came the BS takeover when many contributors were left off the 'bridge' and ended up with ridiculously low sub royalties that undercut even SS sub commissions. Then, in many recent months many contributors have seen a declining trend in downloads (I surely have), probably due to the massive growth in content at the agency.  And finally there's been no raise for contributors in a long, long time ..

The sheen has certainly worn off. Sad.  :(


« Reply #37 on: April 18, 2015, 03:49 »
+14
Every king can loose his crown fast...

« Reply #38 on: April 18, 2015, 05:35 »
+5
I believe the next move from SS is the introduction of some sort of Bigstock level structure for contributors, cutting even more from that .38 that pay us.

Tror

« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2015, 05:36 »
+4
I believe the next move from SS is the introduction of some sort of Bigstock level structure for contributors, cutting even more from that .38 that pay us.

Thats possible.

« Reply #40 on: April 18, 2015, 07:29 »
-2
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?

Given that it is publicly traded, you could buy shares.  ::)

And contribute to the biggest Ponzi on the planet...Wall Street....no thanks!  ;)

shareholders my @r$e. yes, you are right, the biggest Ponzi on the planet. shareholders are no better than scavengers, as they will sell the ss stock soon enough once they made their profit.
i suppose when the stocks crash it will be karma for them for * the contributors dry ;D

remember what goes around comes around...

« Reply #41 on: April 18, 2015, 08:46 »
0
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?

Given that it is publicly traded, you could buy shares.  ::)

And contribute to the biggest Ponzi on the planet...Wall Street....no thanks!  ;)

shareholders my @r$e. yes, you are right, the biggest Ponzi on the planet. shareholders are no better than scavengers, as they will sell the ss stock soon enough once they made their profit.
i suppose when the stocks crash it will be karma for them for * the contributors dry ;D

remember what goes around comes around...[/c
[/i]olor]

I hate to say it but I cannot wait for the day a BIG MESSAGE is sent to one of the agencies, particularly a big agency.

« Reply #42 on: April 18, 2015, 11:01 »
+2
Yes, the key players stand to make more money if they drive the stock prices higher by squeezing contributors. However they do not rely on that solely to make money from SSTK

They regularly grant themselves stock at a cost to themselves of 0$

For instance  on 04/13/2015 they granted the new Chief Marketing Officer Aditi Javeri Gokhale 42,000 shares of SSTK - Award at $0 per share

They also set up automatic trades to sell this stock and then grant themselves more at a cost of $0 every few months.

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Stock/SSTK/insideractions

Rinderart

« Reply #43 on: April 18, 2015, 11:29 »
+4
I was already wondering why subs were drying up and ODD's were nowhere to be founds these last few weeks. As if things couldn't get worse in microstock already. 

I think microstock is going to be very, very different, 3 years from now...

try One year.

« Reply #44 on: April 18, 2015, 14:17 »
+9
I was already wondering why subs were drying up and ODD's were nowhere to be founds these last few weeks. As if things couldn't get worse in microstock already. 

I think microstock is going to be very, very different, 3 years from now...

try One year.

We are seeing it NOW!!

« Reply #45 on: April 18, 2015, 16:18 »
0
Yes, the key players stand to make more money if they drive the stock prices higher by squeezing contributors. However they do not rely on that solely to make money from SSTK

They regularly grant themselves stock at a cost to themselves of 0$

For instance  on 04/13/2015 they granted the new Chief Marketing Officer Aditi Javeri Gokhale 42,000 shares of SSTK - Award at $0 per share

They also set up automatic trades to sell this stock and then grant themselves more at a cost of $0 every few months.

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Stock/SSTK/insideractions


Wish they would do that for contributors...

« Reply #46 on: April 18, 2015, 17:34 »
+4
Yes, the key players stand to make more money if they drive the stock prices higher by squeezing contributors. However they do not rely on that solely to make money from SSTK

They regularly grant themselves stock at a cost to themselves of 0$

For instance  on 04/13/2015 they granted the new Chief Marketing Officer Aditi Javeri Gokhale 42,000 shares of SSTK - Award at $0 per share

They also set up automatic trades to sell this stock and then grant themselves more at a cost of $0 every few months.

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Stock/SSTK/insideractions


Wish they would do that for contributors...


*not holding breath*


« Reply #47 on: April 20, 2015, 22:21 »
+5
No single OOD and SOD in last week, which is very strange and disappointing.

Seems like SS agents do not read this forum anymore, so no point of complaining. It has come to a point either you keep contributing or go away with your files and make better use of them elsewhere.

« Reply #48 on: April 21, 2015, 04:41 »
0
Yes, the key players stand to make more money if they drive the stock prices higher by squeezing contributors. However they do not rely on that solely to make money from SSTK

They regularly grant themselves stock at a cost to themselves of 0$

For instance  on 04/13/2015 they granted the new Chief Marketing Officer Aditi Javeri Gokhale 42,000 shares of SSTK - Award at $0 per share

They also set up automatic trades to sell this stock and then grant themselves more at a cost of $0 every few months.

http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/Stock/SSTK/insideractions


Not to get too off topic, but how does granting the stock work? Do they have a stockpile of shares from the initial offering that they give out or are they "printing" new shares, so diluting the value of each share out there already?

If it's the former I can't see the problem, if the latter then I cant understand how its legal as the company has to be run for the benefit of the existing share holders who will see the value of their shares reduced when new ones are created?

« Reply #49 on: April 21, 2015, 05:04 »
+1
As a private individual, I have come to expect nothing of benefit to me from large publicly-owned corporations.....and, so far, I have not been disappointed. Every individual, whether employed or as freelance, has to work harder and harder for less and less reward to satisfy the demands of the stockholders for ever greater return. It's the way the system works and I'm used to it by now.  :(
With all do respect, if everyone thinks like that, you give them free hand to screw you over till you have no other choice then to pack up and find a day job.

Reminds me of a docu called Food Inc. Chicken farmers squeezed dry by corporates  to the bone until they cave.

So what are YOU going to do about it?
I closed several accounts and started my own site selling direct. What about you?

Any of the big earners, though?

It's easy to close an account on an agency which is responsible for 1% of your income, how about 15%+ range?

Semmick Photo

« Reply #50 on: April 21, 2015, 05:54 »
+1
Damned if I do, damned if I  dont.  :o

« Reply #51 on: April 21, 2015, 07:38 »
+6
Every king can loose his crown fast...

In this business that is very accurate. From a competitive viewpoint it's like walking on eggshells. One cracks and they all crack. In SS case, they are probably trying to accomplish two major things:

1. Shareholder wealth
2. Competitive responses/positioning

But #1 AND #2 comes as our expense, unfortunately. 

Just as an aside, I now go check my SS account for a BIG sales as my subs are not in the 20-30 a day average, down from 50-60 a day my OD's are fairly rare (0-3 a day avg) and I have not gotten a $28 commission in about 8 weeks since they made their package changes. The ONLY way I am "making my month" is the random big sale. Other than that I will have taken my first pay cut at SS in 8 years since I started with them.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #52 on: April 21, 2015, 09:27 »
+6
I was already wondering why subs were drying up and ODD's were nowhere to be founds these last few weeks. As if things couldn't get worse in microstock already. 

I think microstock is going to be very, very different, 3 years from now...

Funny enough I said this 4 days ago, but today I received a whopping 20 ODD's!

Shelma1

« Reply #53 on: April 21, 2015, 09:45 »
+1
I was already wondering why subs were drying up and ODD's were nowhere to be founds these last few weeks. As if things couldn't get worse in microstock already. 

I think microstock is going to be very, very different, 3 years from now...

Funny enough I said this 4 days ago, but today I received a whopping 20 ODD's!

Congrats! :)

« Reply #54 on: April 21, 2015, 10:09 »
+1
I was already wondering why subs were drying up and ODD's were nowhere to be founds these last few weeks. As if things couldn't get worse in microstock already. 

I think microstock is going to be very, very different, 3 years from now...

Funny enough I said this 4 days ago, but today I received a whopping 20 ODD's!
Good job!

« Reply #55 on: April 22, 2015, 12:45 »
+4
Every king can loose his crown fast...

In this business that is very accurate. From a competitive viewpoint it's like walking on eggshells. One cracks and they all crack. In SS case, they are probably trying to accomplish two major things:

1. Shareholder wealth
2. Competitive responses/positioning

But #1 AND #2 comes as our expense, unfortunately. 

Just as an aside, I now go check my SS account for a BIG sales as my subs are not in the 20-30 a day average, down from 50-60 a day my OD's are fairly rare (0-3 a day avg) and I have not gotten a $28 commission in about 8 weeks since they made their package changes. The ONLY way I am "making my month" is the random big sale. Other than that I will have taken my first pay cut at SS in 8 years since I started with them.

Everything in this business comes at our expense. You could list #1 thru #20 and we'd be #20.

« Reply #56 on: May 05, 2015, 14:49 »
+2
Not claiming anything to be fact but if I compare these prices to what I still see

199 euro for 750 month = 0.27 c/i
165 euro for 350 month = 0.47 c/i

Shutterstock gave themselves a 20 cent raise per image. And nuttin' for us. So it seems.

New pricing?


Old pricing

They stiffed us on the raise and now they are sneaking in hidden royalty decreases.



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
3445 Views
Last post March 31, 2006, 02:38
by CJPhoto
67 Replies
17769 Views
Last post February 28, 2007, 16:14
by epixx
16 Replies
4677 Views
Last post March 26, 2009, 14:35
by tan510jomast
36 Replies
13882 Views
Last post December 24, 2009, 01:54
by traveler1116
2 Replies
1061 Views
Last post January 14, 2019, 12:46
by medveh

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results