Author Topic: Shutterstock Reports Q2 2014 Financial Results (Read 22633 times)

gbalex · « **on:** August 07, 2014, 18:50 »

SOURCE Shutterstock, Inc.

- Second quarter revenue increased 41% from prior year, to $80.2 million

- Adjusted EBITDA increased 25% to $16.8 million

- Quarterly paid downloads increased 30% to a record 31.5 million

- Collection grew 42%; currently exceeds 40 million images

http://tinyurl.com/mowfcp8

gostwyck · « **Reply #1 on:** August 07, 2014, 19:04 »

Quote from: gbalex on August 07, 2014, 18:50

SOURCE Shutterstock, Inc.

- Second quarter revenue increased 41% from prior year, to $80.2 million

- Adjusted EBITDA increased 25% to $16.8 million

- Quarterly paid downloads increased 30% to a record 31.5 million

- Collection grew 42%; currently exceeds 40 million images

http://tinyurl.com/mowfcp8

Bar-stewards, eh? Thieving from their loyal contributors even more? I think we need one of your conspiracy theories to explain what they're doing to us all again. Don't let us down!

gbalex · « **Reply #2 on:** August 07, 2014, 19:29 »

Quote from: gostwyck on August 07, 2014, 19:04

Quote from: gbalex on August 07, 2014, 18:50
SOURCE Shutterstock, Inc.

- Second quarter revenue increased 41% from prior year, to $80.2 million

- Adjusted EBITDA increased 25% to $16.8 million

- Quarterly paid downloads increased 30% to a record 31.5 million

- Collection grew 42%; currently exceeds 40 million images

http://tinyurl.com/mowfcp8

Bar-stewards, eh? Thieving from their loyal contributors even more? I think we need one of your conspiracy theories to explain what they're doing to us all again. Don't let us down!

Right on cue

mike ledray · « **Reply #3 on:** August 07, 2014, 21:24 »

Being a Owner of Shutterstock Stock (on opening morning no less) all I can say is CHACHINNG!
Thank You
$$$$$$$$$

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #4 on:** August 08, 2014, 01:48 »

30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** August 08, 2014, 01:52 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48

30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

assuming all images sell the same. If you upload images that sell more than 99% of the others then you will see growth even if you don't upload as many as you suggest.
The challenge 'simply' lies in uploading something better than the rest

pixsol · « **Reply #6 on:** August 08, 2014, 01:56 »

Quote from: leaf on August 08, 2014, 01:52

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48
30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

assuming all images sell the same. If you upload images that sell more than 99% of the others then you will see growth even if you don't upload as many as you suggest.
The challenge 'simply' lies in uploading something better than the rest

... and be lucky enough to be seen first

Nikovsk · « **Reply #7 on:** August 08, 2014, 02:01 »

Quote from: mike ledray on August 07, 2014, 21:24

Being a Owner of Shutterstock Stock (on opening morning no less) all I can say is CHACHINNG!
Thank You
$$$$$$$$$

LOL good luck with this time bomb.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #8 on:** August 08, 2014, 03:21 »

Quote from: leaf on August 08, 2014, 01:52

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48
30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

assuming all images sell the same. If you upload images that sell more than 99% of the others then you will see growth even if you don't upload as many as you suggest.
The challenge 'simply' lies in uploading something better than the rest

Not really. I'm assuming your own images will be of the same quality as the ones you already upload. If you already outsell me 10 to 1, and neither of us upload anything for a year, you will still outsell me 10 to 1, but you will sell 40% fewer files at the end of the year than at the start.

Of course there's nothing exact about it, but that's the way things are heading.

As for the drive constantly to upload something better than the rest, that's what got us here in the first place.

dirkr · « **Reply #9 on:** August 08, 2014, 05:24 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48

30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

I think the numbers describe annual growth, not quarterly.
Supply is outgrowing demand, but "only" by 9% per year.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #10 on:** August 08, 2014, 06:00 »

Quote from: dirkr on August 08, 2014, 05:24

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48
30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

I think the numbers describe annual growth, not quarterly.
Supply is outgrowing demand, but "only" by 9% per year.

Yes, you're right.

gbalex · « **Reply #11 on:** August 08, 2014, 10:06 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48

30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

Yes it is an 29.62% increase in downloads, a 42.12% increase for images in the collection creating a 12.5% catch up gap for contributors.

Shutterstock had a 8.15% increase in Revenue Per Download

gbalex · « **Reply #12 on:** August 08, 2014, 10:15 »

Quote from: leaf on August 08, 2014, 01:52

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48
30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

assuming all images sell the same. If you upload images that sell more than 99% of the others then you will see growth even if you don't upload as many as you suggest.
The challenge 'simply' lies in uploading something better than the rest

I would have agreed with you a before they made search changes and the buyers were free to choose content. If buyers do no see your content they can not buy it, which is exactly why some of us have seen huge drops in income.

gnirtS · « **Reply #13 on:** August 08, 2014, 10:19 »

Quote from: leaf on August 08, 2014, 01:52

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48
30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

assuming all images sell the same. If you upload images that sell more than 99% of the others then you will see growth even if you don't upload as many as you suggest.
The challenge 'simply' lies in uploading something better than the rest

True to an extent but you're still at the mercy of random search engine changes.

cthoman · « **Reply #14 on:** August 08, 2014, 10:24 »

Quote from: gbalex on August 08, 2014, 10:15

Quote from: leaf on August 08, 2014, 01:52
Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on August 08, 2014, 01:48
30% dl increase, 42% collection growth = 9% fewer sales per image, therefore you need to grow your portfolio 9% per quarter (about 40% per year) just to stand still, if my arithmetic is any good.

assuming all images sell the same. If you upload images that sell more than 99% of the others then you will see growth even if you don't upload as many as you suggest.
The challenge 'simply' lies in uploading something better than the rest

I would have agreed with you a before they made search changes and the buyers were free to choose content. If buyers do no see your content they can not buy it, which is exactly why some of us have seen huge drops in income.

Portfolio size is kind of a weird conundrum. It almost seems like you hit a market saturation for your images at a certain portfolio size. After that, you just kind of maintain or grow or shrink slowly.

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #15 on:** August 08, 2014, 10:33 »

I see, SS by changing the search so buyers don't see the same old crap, every day, month after month, are not free to choose? (in your words) I'd argue the buyers are able to see more new and different material.

True it might be hurting some long time first page people, and old images that had established position in the search, but for buyers, it allows them more freedom of choice, not less, as you claim?

True otherwise, if they don't see something they can't buy it. Rather obvious observation. True also, some have seen drops in income, which could be partially caused by search changes, but things have changed in many other ways, means limiting ones assumptions to a preconceived conclusion (It's The Search...) and ignoring the rest of the facts, leads to nowhere.

You posted the answer yourself:

- Collection grew 42%; currently exceeds 40 million images
- Quarterly paid downloads increased 30% to a record 31.5 million
- Second quarter revenue increased 41% from prior year, to $80.2 million

Competition just grew 42%! It would seem obvious that as a result, our individual sales would decrease.

Quote from: gbalex on August 08, 2014, 10:15

I would have agreed with you a before they made search changes and the buyers were free to choose content. If buyers do no see your content they can not buy it, which is exactly why some of us have seen huge drops in income.

CatTheCat · « **Reply #16 on:** August 08, 2014, 18:12 »

Why SS revenue increased 41% and paid download only 30%?
I don't understand that difference.

disorderly · « **Reply #17 on:** August 08, 2014, 18:26 »

Quote from: CatTheCat on August 08, 2014, 18:12

Why SS revenue increased 41% and paid download only 30%?
I don't understand that difference.

Do you really not understand that those two percentages have nothing to do with each other? Revenue is related to the volume of sales; the more you sell, the more your revenue grows. That is separate from your profit, which depends both on the volume of sales (the more you sell, the less your fixed costs bring you down) and your profit margins. Assume the margins stay the same, including the cost of sales (what they pay us, plus anything else that enables them to sell).

CatTheCat · « **Reply #18 on:** August 08, 2014, 19:06 »

Thank you.
For a moment I thought that there could be a bug, not reporting all the downloads on the contributors accounts.

Shelma1 · « **Reply #19 on:** August 08, 2014, 19:59 »

We may have to upload even more images than we thought to break even:

"Thilo Semmelbauer

Thanks, Jon. In Q2, we continue to focus aggressively on both sides of our marketplace, customers and contributors which reinforce and drive each other fueling our growth. Our contributor base is more active and more loyal than ever before. We added 3.4 million images to our collection in Q2, 60% more than we added in Q2 last year. Our collection is growing more quickly than ever and we ended the quarter with 38.8 million images, the largest and freshest library of its kind.

We also added more new contributors in Q2 than in any prior quarter, with over 64,000 improved and active contributors from around the world and a 24x7 processing operation to vet every image. "

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2399635-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-on-q2-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?dr=1

Uncle Pete · « **Reply #20 on:** August 08, 2014, 22:10 »

Holy Cow! 64,000 contributors that are "active". That's even more troublesome (financially for myself) than just more photos. The competition looked to be leveling off and this says instead, it's growing. Add one more reason why each of us will make less, no matter how good the product is that we produce.

Quote from: Shelma1 on August 08, 2014, 19:59

We also added more new contributors in Q2 than in any prior quarter, with over 64,000 improved and active contributors from around the world and a 24x7 processing operation to vet every image. "

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2399635-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-on-q2-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?dr=1

PixelBytes · « **Reply #21 on:** August 08, 2014, 22:55 »

Quote from: Uncle Pete on August 08, 2014, 22:10

Holy Cow! 64,000 contributors that are "active". That's even more troublesome (financially for myself) than just more photos.

I don't know what means 'active' in this case. If you upload 1 picture a month does that make you 'active'? Probably no more than a couple thousand or less reach payout each month.

LesPalenik · « **Reply #22 on:** August 08, 2014, 22:55 »

Quote from: Shelma1 on August 08, 2014, 19:59

the largest and freshest library of its kind.

I wonder how many of those "fresh" images are 10 year-old pictures from ex-IS exclusives.

gbalex · « **Reply #23 on:** August 09, 2014, 01:44 »

Quote from: LesPalenik on August 08, 2014, 22:55

Quote from: Shelma1 on August 08, 2014, 19:59
We may have to upload even more images than we thought to break even:

"Thilo Semmelbauer

Thanks, Jon. In Q2, we continue to focus aggressively on both sides of our marketplace, customers and contributors which reinforce and drive each other fueling our growth. Our contributor base is more active and more loyal than ever before. We added 3.4 million images to our collection in Q2, 60% more than we added in Q2 last year. Our collection is growing more quickly than ever and we ended the quarter with 38.8 million images, the largest and freshest library of its kind.

We also added more new contributors in Q2 than in any prior quarter, with over 64,000 "improved" and active contributors from around the world and a 24x7 processing operation to vet every image. "

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2399635-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-on-q2-2014-results-earnings-call-transcript?dr=1

I wonder how many of those "fresh" images are 10 year-old pictures from ex-IS exclusives.

Exactly

No wonder they killed the top 100. I wonder how loyal the new group will be once the new contributor bump wears off and they are courting new contributors as replacements via skillfeed.

I know a large number of long time contributors, who are not at all happy with the way things have transpired at shutterstock.

Just keep up the slams on the contributors who helped Jon get there Theo. More and more of us are getting your messages loud and clear and our pocket books are telling the full story.

gbalex · « **Reply #24 on:** August 09, 2014, 01:49 »

Quote from: PixelBytes on August 08, 2014, 22:55

Quote from: Uncle Pete on August 08, 2014, 22:10
Holy Cow! 64,000 contributors that are "active". That's even more troublesome (financially for myself) than just more photos.

I don't know what means 'active' in this case. If you upload 1 picture a month does that make you 'active'? Probably no more than a couple thousand or less reach payout each month.

Marketing hype for the analyst, up selling SSTK stock valuation.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Shutterstock Reports Q2 2014 Financial Results (Read 22633 times)

gbalex

gostwyck

gbalex

mike ledray

BaldricksTrousers

leaf

pixsol

Nikovsk

BaldricksTrousers

dirkr

BaldricksTrousers

gbalex

gbalex

gnirtS

cthoman

Uncle Pete

CatTheCat

disorderly

CatTheCat

Shelma1

Uncle Pete

PixelBytes

LesPalenik

gbalex

gbalex

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors