MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2013 Financial Results  (Read 14423 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 20, 2014, 16:40 »
+10
http://seekingalpha.com/pr/9033813-shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2013-financial-results

- Fourth quarter revenue increases 38% from prior year, to $68.0 million
- Full year revenue increases 39% from prior year, to $235.5 million
- Adjusted EBITDA of $15.4 million in fourth quarter, increase of 37%
- Adjusted EBITDA of $53.4 million for full year, increase of 53%
- Quarterly paid image downloads reach record of 28.0 million
- Collection exceeds 33 million images and 1.5 million video clips
- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 940,000


« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2014, 16:46 »
+13
Impressive numbers!

And run their business smoothly without all the drama, have staff that feel comfortable on the internet and like to meet artists in person. Support msg and answer questions here.

While istock cant even update their seasonal images on the front page in time...

Processing files for upload...

« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2014, 16:49 »
0
Impressive numbers!

And run their business smoothly without all the drama, have staff that feel comfortable on the internet and like to meet artists in person. Support msg and answer questions here.

While istock cant even update their seasonal images on the front page in time...

Processing files for upload...

bang on!

« Reply #3 on: February 20, 2014, 17:31 »
0
http://seekingalpha.com/pr/9033813-shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2013-financial-results

- Fourth quarter revenue increases 38% from prior year, to $68.0 million
- Full year revenue increases 39% from prior year, to $235.5 million
- Adjusted EBITDA of $15.4 million in fourth quarter, increase of 37%
- Adjusted EBITDA of $53.4 million for full year, increase of 53%
- Quarterly paid image downloads reach record of 28.0 million
- Collection exceeds 33 million images and 1.5 million video clips
- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 940,000


It can't just be the 'Sean Effect' surely?

Professionals deal with professionals.

shudderstok

« Reply #4 on: February 20, 2014, 19:30 »
+2
http://seekingalpha.com/pr/9033813-shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2013-financial-results

- Fourth quarter revenue increases 38% from prior year, to $68.0 million
- Full year revenue increases 39% from prior year, to $235.5 million
- Adjusted EBITDA of $15.4 million in fourth quarter, increase of 37%
- Adjusted EBITDA of $53.4 million for full year, increase of 53%
- Quarterly paid image downloads reach record of 28.0 million
- Collection exceeds 33 million images and 1.5 million video clips
- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 940,000


It can't just be the 'Sean Effect' surely?

Professionals deal with professionals.


that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations


mlwinphoto

« Reply #5 on: February 20, 2014, 19:57 »
+3
http://seekingalpha.com/pr/9033813-shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2013-financial-results

- Fourth quarter revenue increases 38% from prior year, to $68.0 million
- Full year revenue increases 39% from prior year, to $235.5 million
- Adjusted EBITDA of $15.4 million in fourth quarter, increase of 37%
- Adjusted EBITDA of $53.4 million for full year, increase of 53%
- Quarterly paid image downloads reach record of 28.0 million
- Collection exceeds 33 million images and 1.5 million video clips
- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 940,000


It can't just be the 'Sean Effect' surely?

Professionals deal with professionals.


that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations


Thanks!  Appreciate the sentiments.

BTW, it's considerably higher, on average, than 0.25 - 0.38.

« Reply #6 on: February 20, 2014, 20:13 »
+7
that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations

Well yesterday I had 117 sales on SS which, thanks to 4 SOD's and many more OOD's, made just under $300. I'm happy enough with that.

I think that works out at a tad more than the 25-38c per download you quoted?

shudderstok

« Reply #7 on: February 20, 2014, 20:26 »
-5
that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations

Well yesterday I had 117 sales on SS which, thanks to 4 SOD's and many more OOD's, made just under $300. I'm happy enough with that.

I think that works out at a tad more than the 25-38c per download you quoted?

WOW, roughly $2.50 per image with whatever sod's and ood's are. no wonder ortner is a billionaire on paper. i make the just shy of $300 daily on IS from 20-25 or so downloads, i know my worth. not sure why i would want to sell my work for a fraction of that, but i guess folks like you enjoy selling their work for as little as they can.
also noted how you did not have a snappy come back on the RM issue, seems to silenced your man as well.
keep up the good work, glad you are happy with SS, but it's certainly not for me, i'd quite photography before i sold for those amounts.

« Reply #8 on: February 20, 2014, 20:28 »
0
thats the name of the game.

« Reply #9 on: February 20, 2014, 20:31 »
+2

that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations

Even if it was only 0.25-0.38, you are reaching almost a million customers. Quantity does count. While some might be able to make a great living excluding subscriptions, ignoring that huge market wouldn't be a wise choice, at least for me.

« Reply #10 on: February 20, 2014, 20:46 »
+6
that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations

Well yesterday I had 117 sales on SS which, thanks to 4 SOD's and many more OOD's, made just under $300. I'm happy enough with that.

I think that works out at a tad more than the 25-38c per download you quoted?

WOW, roughly $2.50 per image with whatever sod's and ood's are. no wonder ortner is a billionaire on paper. i make the just shy of $300 daily on IS from 20-25 or so downloads, i know my worth. not sure why i would want to sell my work for a fraction of that, but i guess folks like you enjoy selling their work for as little as they can.
also noted how you did not have a snappy come back on the RM issue, seems to silenced your man as well.
keep up the good work, glad you are happy with SS, but it's certainly not for me, i'd quite photography before i sold for those amounts.

What 'RM issue' was I supposed to have a snappy answer to? Yours was the first mention of RM in this thread.

Nice to hear you're doing so well at IS anyway! Good luck with that sinking ship , oops, I mean 'outstanding agency'.

Btw, don't forget that SS, for most independent contributors, only represents about half their earnings. You just lost $300 yesterday by not being independent.

ShadySue

« Reply #11 on: February 20, 2014, 21:00 »
-2
Btw, don't forget that SS, for most independent contributors, only represents about half their earnings. You just lost $300 yesterday by not being independent.
But he'd have lost a lot by having to sell at M prices on iStock. Unless M files are stealing dls from exclusives, which is perfectly possible.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2014, 21:47 by ShadySue »

shudderstok

« Reply #12 on: February 20, 2014, 21:08 »
+4
that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations

Well yesterday I had 117 sales on SS which, thanks to 4 SOD's and many more OOD's, made just under $300. I'm happy enough with that.

I think that works out at a tad more than the 25-38c per download you quoted?

WOW, roughly $2.50 per image with whatever sod's and ood's are. no wonder ortner is a billionaire on paper. i make the just shy of $300 daily on IS from 20-25 or so downloads, i know my worth. not sure why i would want to sell my work for a fraction of that, but i guess folks like you enjoy selling their work for as little as they can.
also noted how you did not have a snappy come back on the RM issue, seems to silenced your man as well.
keep up the good work, glad you are happy with SS, but it's certainly not for me, i'd quite photography before i sold for those amounts.

What 'RM issue' was I supposed to have a snappy answer to? Yours was the first mention of RM in this thread.

Nice to hear you're doing so well at IS anyway! Good luck with that sinking ship , oops, I mean 'outstanding agency'.

Btw, don't forget that SS, for most independent contributors, only represents about half their earnings. You just lost $300 yesterday by not being independent.

yes i can see that.

judging from any consistency here, the microstock poll results for site earnings rating (top right of this page) always clearly shows exclusive always pays better than all the sites reporting combined. in fact it has been this way for as long as i can remember.

so why would anybody in their right mind want to upload to ten sites or more to make less money on average? that amigo makes no sense at all to me.

i think basing results of the poll is accurate give or take of a good reflection of photographers earnings. i could care less about how much SS or GI make, that is not going in my pocket, and if i can spend less time uploading to make more money, that is what i am going to do.

if it works for you, excellent, good to hear, but i would not submit at SS on principle and i sure as hell would not sugar coat it and call an act of desperation and 'experiment'.

whatever works for you is all that matters. i just don't see the point in working so hard to make so little when i can work less and make more.




« Reply #13 on: February 20, 2014, 21:27 »
+5
that's why they 'experiment' LOL
enjoy making your 0.25 - 0.38 per download pros
welcome to the walmart of stock, you made it to the bottom, congratulations

Well yesterday I had 117 sales on SS which, thanks to 4 SOD's and many more OOD's, made just under $300. I'm happy enough with that.

I think that works out at a tad more than the 25-38c per download you quoted?

WOW, roughly $2.50 per image with whatever sod's and ood's are. no wonder ortner is a billionaire on paper. i make the just shy of $300 daily on IS from 20-25 or so downloads, i know my worth. not sure why i would want to sell my work for a fraction of that, but i guess folks like you enjoy selling their work for as little as they can.
also noted how you did not have a snappy come back on the RM issue, seems to silenced your man as well.
keep up the good work, glad you are happy with SS, but it's certainly not for me, i'd quite photography before i sold for those amounts.

What 'RM issue' was I supposed to have a snappy answer to? Yours was the first mention of RM in this thread.

Nice to hear you're doing so well at IS anyway! Good luck with that sinking ship , oops, I mean 'outstanding agency'.

Btw, don't forget that SS, for most independent contributors, only represents about half their earnings. You just lost $300 yesterday by not being independent.

yes i can see that.

judging from any consistency here, the microstock poll results for site earnings rating (top right of this page) always clearly shows exclusive always pays better than all the sites reporting combined. in fact it has been this way for as long as i can remember.

so why would anybody in their right mind want to upload to ten sites or more to make less money on average? that amigo makes no sense at all to me.

i think basing results of the poll is accurate give or take of a good reflection of photographers earnings. i could care less about how much SS or GI make, that is not going in my pocket, and if i can spend less time uploading to make more money, that is what i am going to do.

if it works for you, excellent, good to hear, but i would not submit at SS on principle and i sure as hell would not sugar coat it and call an act of desperation and 'experiment'.

whatever works for you is all that matters. i just don't see the point in working so hard to make so little when i can work less and make more.

Trust me, you'll be uploading to SS soon enough!

IS have been saying for years that their business is "unsustainable" ... and so it will prove to be.

Hold on tight ... because you're in for a very rough ride!

ShadySue

« Reply #14 on: February 20, 2014, 21:48 »
0
Btw, don't forget that SS, for most independent contributors, only represents about half their earnings. You just lost $300 yesterday by not being independent.
But he'd have lost a lot by having to sell at M prices on iStock. Unless M files are stealing dls from exclusives, which is perfectly possible.
Would whoever minussed that care to explain their arithmetic?

shudderstok

« Reply #15 on: February 20, 2014, 22:19 »
+1
Btw, don't forget that SS, for most independent contributors, only represents about half their earnings. You just lost $300 yesterday by not being independent.
But he'd have lost a lot by having to sell at M prices on iStock. Unless M files are stealing dls from exclusives, which is perfectly possible.
Would whoever minussed that care to explain their arithmetic?

they can't explain, there is too much of a hate on for anything IS or GI that if one even remotely says something logical you will get minussed for it. selling at M prices in addition to the paltry royalty IS has on offer for non-exclusives will not be made up at SS making a pittance over there, and at twice the workload.

the math is simple in my books, just look at the earnings ratings. 18 sites that have ratings, including SS and IS come out to 213.5 and IS exclusive alone comes out to 295.1 now that tells me clearly that i would be doing 18 times the amount of work for only 72% of what i would make if i was exclusive. in addition they devalue their own work and the value of photography in general. the poll does not lie, it is contributors from this forum that populate the statistics, not SS or IS. and there has been a consistency in the results for a very long time.

and the logic on this forum is that i actually lost $300.



« Reply #16 on: February 20, 2014, 22:37 »
+7
I think uploading to IS was maybe only a little less work than all the other sites combined. My main reason for not going exclusive there (before the whole unsustainable business and the RC debacle) was that about every 6 months or year they would do something to the search and my downloads would drop about 50%. Then they would slowly go up approximately proportional to the number of new uploads I had before another search change and precipitous drop.

I look forward to seeing gbalex or someone else really digging out the SS numbers - are downloads per file going up? revenue per image, etc.


« Reply #17 on: February 20, 2014, 23:13 »
+8
I'm not going to engage in debate over exclusive vs indie, but I don't think you're comparing apples to apples in thinking you do better than the poll

I think that there are a ton of newbie figures in everything but the IS exclusive poll. If you filtered those out I think you'd see something very different - earnings comparable with risk spread as an indie vs less admin work and all your eggs in one basket as exclusive

Goofy

« Reply #18 on: February 20, 2014, 23:25 »
+9
I can predict the future-

shudderstok = shutterstock


 8)


shudderstok

« Reply #19 on: February 21, 2014, 00:17 »
0
I can predict the future-

shudderstok = shutterstock


 8)

i had to + you on that - good one but my fortune teller told me otherwise :)

« Reply #20 on: February 21, 2014, 01:22 »
+1
Yesterday : 82.46 -0.14 (-0.17%)
After Hours: 88.10 +5.64 (6.84%)

Financial Outlook

The Company's current financial and operating expectations for the first quarter of 2014 and updated expectations for full year 2014 are as follows:

First Quarter 2014

Revenue of $69 - $70 million
Adjusted EBITDA of $12 - $13 million
Non-cash equity-based compensation expense of approximately $5 million
An effective tax rate of approximately 40%
Capital expenditures of approximately $7 million
Full Year 2014

Revenue of $305 - $310 million
Adjusted EBITDA of  $68 - $70 million
Non-cash equity-based compensation expense of approximately $18 million
An effective tax rate of approximately 40%
Capital expenditures of approximately $14 million


hmm still sad you didn't buy the stock at the beginning? :) me too

« Reply #21 on: February 21, 2014, 02:11 »
+3
I'm not going to engage in debate over exclusive vs indie, but I don't think you're comparing apples to apples in thinking you do better than the poll

I think that there are a ton of newbie figures in everything but the IS exclusive poll. If you filtered those out I think you'd see something very different - earnings comparable with risk spread as an indie vs less admin work and all your eggs in one basket as exclusive
+1

Being a newbie myself, it is a long route to become an IS exclusive considering the very few DLs I get in IS. I am happy that SS gives a reasonable revenue opportunity for newbies. For the sake of all the photographes (pros and amateurs), I would like a range of agencies to be successful and just not one. If the agencies can also become more contributor friendly, nothing like it  :)

« Reply #22 on: February 21, 2014, 02:29 »
+10
if iStock is doing that well why are you guys (all the time) wasting your time here on SS financial results topics trying to convert or telling us how bad it is to upload to SS? any reports from iStock? yeah had that feeling! guess it isn't worth to discuss if there isn't any data, now please move along and don't forget to enjoy the smooth iStock submission process and of course the incredible increase of buyers out there ;D

« Reply #23 on: February 21, 2014, 02:38 »
0
http://seekingalpha.com/pr/9033813-shutterstock-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2013-financial-results

- Fourth quarter revenue increases 38% from prior year, to $68.0 million
- Full year revenue increases 39% from prior year, to $235.5 million
- Adjusted EBITDA of $15.4 million in fourth quarter, increase of 37%
- Adjusted EBITDA of $53.4 million for full year, increase of 53%
- Quarterly paid image downloads reach record of 28.0 million
- Collection exceeds 33 million images and 1.5 million video clips
- Number of active customer accounts surpasses 940,000


Impressive numbers!

« Reply #24 on: February 21, 2014, 03:13 »
+1
are downloads per file going up? revenue per image, etc.

2012 - 169.6 M revenue - 23.3 M images - 7.27$ RPI - 76 M downloads - 2.23$ RPD - collection was downloaded 3.26 times

2013 - 235.5 M revenue - 32.2 M images - 7.31$ RPI - 100.1 M downloads  - 2.35$ RPD - collection was downloaded 3.10 times


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
918 Views
Last post November 02, 2012, 20:48
by luissantos84
2 Replies
1986 Views
Last post November 09, 2013, 16:58
by Pauws99
14 Replies
12988 Views
Last post May 10, 2014, 03:10
by BaldricksTrousers
13 Replies
3112 Views
Last post February 13, 2015, 13:52
by etudiante_rapide
7 Replies
2108 Views
Last post May 07, 2015, 14:17
by Semmick Photo

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results