MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstocks 2017 Contributor Earnings Report  (Read 7370 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2017, 08:59 »
+1
<p>Shutterstock Contributor Earnings Report 2017" width="1024" height="7877" style="max-width: 100%; height: auto; margin-bottom: .5em;
 Via The Shutterstock Blog.</p>

« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2017, 09:46 »
0
what scale did they use on the total $ paid out graph? it looks like 10M per horizontal line near the top, but what is it at the bottom?

I'd love to see that graph have a linear or other reasonable axis and include SS take plus total number of sales plus total number of images for sale. Also a breakout of video would be interesting.

I guess whoever was saying it is all going to Europe wasn't so far off.

« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2017, 10:32 »
0
what scale did they use on the total $ paid out graph? it looks like 10M per horizontal line near the top, but what is it at the bottom?

I'd love to see that graph have a linear or other reasonable axis and include SS take plus total number of sales plus total number of images for sale. Also a breakout of video would be interesting.

I guess whoever was saying it is all going to Europe wasn't so far off.
Even better would be payout per image

ETA looks like they have 125 million images according to the landing page so about 92c per image per year last year I guess. There was a thread on here somewhere cataloguing collection size a while ago, anyone got a link? Should be easy to come up with a graph using that thread and the figures in the SS post.
« Last Edit: May 24, 2017, 10:44 by Justanotherphotographer »

« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2017, 10:35 »
0
Also interesting to see the deceleration in payouts since 2014. Surprised they published a graph showing it so clearly.

« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2017, 13:02 »
+4
Not sure who they're targeting with this graphic. If they're recruiting new contributors, that might explain it - certainly for those of us who are contributors, we focus on our own situation and the increase (or decrease) in payouts. I wish they'd just get the basics right - fixing bugs and generating new sources of revenue - versus spending time on window dressing.

I did find a couple of things interesting. One is that it if you add up the payouts from 2010 to 2016 and compare that to the revenue for those years (from the 2016 annual report), payouts were 24.8% of revenue. They have claimed several times that they pay out about 30% of revenue in royalties (28% from the 2016 earnings call transcript).

The other is the relationship of payouts in the US versus revenue earned there. In the 2016 annual report, SS stated that 2/3 of their revenue came from outside the US - so 1/3 is from the US. Looking at the 2016 payout information, "The Americas", which is more than just the US, received 10.9% of the payout total. In other words, those of us based in the US are not pulling our weight with respect to addressing our own market's needs well.

So much for local content :)

« Reply #6 on: May 24, 2017, 14:45 »
+2
The same as statistics in the hands of a politician...

« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2017, 16:59 »
0
"Looking at the 2016 payout information, "The Americas", which is more than just the US, received 10.9% of the payout total." I assumed  they had a rather "idiosyncratic" definition of the Americas i.e excluding the US  :o. As a piece of management information its close to useless....well actually helping me as a contributor it is useless.

« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2017, 17:16 »
+2
"Looking at the 2016 payout information, "The Americas", which is more than just the US, received 10.9% of the payout total." I assumed  they had a rather "idiosyncratic" definition of the Americas i.e excluding the US  :o. As a piece of management information its close to useless....well actually helping me as a contributor it is useless.

I thought about that, but if you add up all the numbers they do report it's $114.7680 million so I think "The Americas" has to include the US, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, etc.

« Reply #9 on: May 25, 2017, 01:23 »
0
"Looking at the 2016 payout information, "The Americas", which is more than just the US, received 10.9% of the payout total." I assumed  they had a rather "idiosyncratic" definition of the Americas i.e excluding the US  :o. As a piece of management information its close to useless....well actually helping me as a contributor it is useless.

I thought about that, but if you add up all the numbers they do report it's $114.7680 million so I think "The Americas" has to include the US, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, etc.
Yes you are right....seems very odd those that say Microstock is no longer viable in countries having a high cost of living may have a point. If it were broken down by country it would be more testable as standards of living in europe vary widely.

« Reply #10 on: May 25, 2017, 02:01 »
+2
Okay from
https://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/ss-20-million-images-prediction-pool/25/

looks like they hit 20 million images in 2012. According to the chart $46.5 million in payouts so
$46.5 million/20 million images=$2.33 RPI/Year compared to roughly 92c RPI/Year now.

I haven't been able to find the thread where people where posting SS's total collection size on different dates, does anyone remember it?

ETA never mind, waybackmachine gives the landing page with collection size
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 02:19 by Justanotherphotographer »

« Reply #11 on: May 25, 2017, 03:50 »
+6
Here is a quick chart using number of images as reported on SS's front page plus the payouts report. Eta deleted as SS may not like it and close my account.
« Last Edit: May 26, 2017, 11:28 by Justanotherphotographer »

« Reply #12 on: May 25, 2017, 04:04 »
+1
Seem gonna bad? right? :-\

« Reply #13 on: May 25, 2017, 04:08 »
+4
Basically percentage increase in collection size has been outpacing percentage increase in payout since 2012/2013 so drop in RPI since then. 2016 collection grew something like 75% (71M to 125M) while payouts only 16% ($99.1M to 115M) for example.


Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #14 on: May 25, 2017, 06:35 »
+4
Thanks for the chart, Justanotherphotographer.

Goes to show that SS's infographic is pretty meaningless, and not that positive if you look at the RPI over the years.

« Reply #15 on: May 25, 2017, 07:17 »
+6
Thanks for the chart, Justanotherphotographer.

Goes to show that SS's infographic is pretty meaningless, and not that positive if you look at the RPI over the years.

Thanks no problem. It gets even worse if you plot % change in collection size against % change in payout size and watch the lines diverge by an ever widening margin over the last few years. This business model is, to borrow a phrase, "unsustainable". For contributors at least.

« Reply #16 on: May 25, 2017, 19:19 »
+5
...
I did find a couple of things interesting. One is that it if you add up the payouts from 2010 to 2016 and compare that to the revenue for those years (from the 2016 annual report), payouts were 24.8% of revenue. They have claimed several times that they pay out about 30% of revenue in royalties (28% from the 2016 earnings call transcript)....


I received email earlier today from Shutterstock Contributor Support saying that they'd seen my post here and wanted to clarify that the payouts in the infographic were not all payouts made, just those to Shutterstock image & video. So payouts to other brands are not included, but revenue from the other brands is in their 2016 numbers. So this explains why the percentage is different.

I asked them if they'd like me to correct this and was given permission to use the information in their email to do so. So I have :)

I didn't realize they still checked in here...


« Reply #17 on: May 26, 2017, 00:00 »
+6
Shows the contrast between istock or the old fotolia and shutterstock. You would/ did catch a ban from those for looking into or criticising their figures while ss has engaged in conversation instead. Good to see that some of the old community relations is still going on. Maybe they are learning from fotolia's apparent recent change in the way they deal with contributors?

« Reply #18 on: May 26, 2017, 05:07 »
0
Following up from my last post. Like this:

Eta. Also deleted chart
« Last Edit: May 26, 2017, 11:29 by Justanotherphotographer »

« Reply #19 on: May 26, 2017, 05:12 »
0
Me too!I added more images but income down :'(

« Reply #20 on: May 26, 2017, 06:26 »
0
The math is easy and you can clearly see that you'll work more for le$$... No magic here.

« Reply #21 on: May 26, 2017, 07:13 »
+2
Looks like I got about 1/30th of the total payout in 2004. I wish I'd been able to hang on to that percentage  :(

« Reply #22 on: May 26, 2017, 07:18 »
0
Shows the contrast between istock or the old fotolia and shutterstock. You would/ did catch a ban from those for looking into or criticising their figures while ss has engaged in conversation instead. Good to see that some of the old community relations is still going on. Maybe they are learning from fotolia's apparent recent change in the way they deal with contributors?
My understanding is that we are still under caution not to reveal any data concerning SS that might be useful to a rival company, on pain of having our accounts closed.

« Reply #23 on: May 26, 2017, 11:27 »
0
Shows the contrast between istock or the old fotolia and shutterstock. You would/ did catch a ban from those for looking into or criticising their figures while ss has engaged in conversation instead. Good to see that some of the old community relations is still going on. Maybe they are learning from fotolia's apparent recent change in the way they deal with contributors?
My understanding is that we are still under caution not to reveal any data concerning SS that might be useful to a rival company, on pain of having our accounts closed.
Didn't realise that. I will delete my posts. Though I haven't revealed any data that isn't already publicly available, it is just the stuff from their post and the figures on their front page. Better safe than sorry.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
11 Replies
6153 Views
Last post October 25, 2011, 09:15
by RacePhoto
6 Replies
3117 Views
Last post May 09, 2013, 21:28
by pancaketom
4 Replies
3292 Views
Last post March 12, 2015, 09:03
by Uncle Pete
7 Replies
2551 Views
Last post May 07, 2017, 00:15
by dpimborough
8 Replies
3902 Views
Last post April 26, 2019, 14:10
by Pauws99

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle