Agency Based Discussion > Shutterstock.com
sold 64 videos yesterday for 84 cents each
Shelma1:
--- Quote from: cascoly on August 31, 2020, 16:59 ---
--- Quote from: Shelma1 on July 30, 2020, 08:42 ---Negative comments because if everyone had sacrificed a few weeks of income SS would have been forced to roll back their draconian royalty cuts and we'd ALL be back to higher royalties.
--- End quote ---
but that was NEVER going to happen - boycotts never get that sort of cooperation and a boycott with a publicly stated end date tells the boycotted they can ride it out. In addition, the vast majority of contributors likely never even knew there was a boycott.
that still doesnt excuse the negative comments and ad hominem attacks on those who think differently
--- Quote ---Instead, the vast majority stayed, accepting a big loss this year and an even bigger loss come January, rather than a temporary, much smaller loss for a few weeks in June. We own the content. The agencies are nothing without us. But whatevs.
--- End quote ---
and again, you're mis-stating the case by presenting it as either /or rather than a large loss for everyone AND a slightly larger loss for boycotters
--- End quote ---
Well, today's a sad day for me. I just read in the Stock Coalition Facebook group that your work is featured in the Coalition Collection on Pond5. You argue against boycotting and haven't had much nice to say about the Coalition, but you stepped right up to take advantage of the deal they got with Pond5.
So now someone who thinks boycotting Shutterstock is useless reaps the reward of the hard work done by others who sacrificed their income and worked their butts off to try to make a difference.
From now out I'm looking out for number one and nobody else. Because what's the point if my work benefits someone like you? I gave up thousands of dollars in income so YOUR work could be featured while you continue making money on Shutterstock? Ehf that.
Noedelhap:
--- Quote from: Shelma1 on September 15, 2020, 16:22 ---
--- Quote from: cascoly on August 31, 2020, 16:59 ---
--- Quote from: Shelma1 on July 30, 2020, 08:42 ---Negative comments because if everyone had sacrificed a few weeks of income SS would have been forced to roll back their draconian royalty cuts and we'd ALL be back to higher royalties.
--- End quote ---
but that was NEVER going to happen - boycotts never get that sort of cooperation and a boycott with a publicly stated end date tells the boycotted they can ride it out. In addition, the vast majority of contributors likely never even knew there was a boycott.
that still doesnt excuse the negative comments and ad hominem attacks on those who think differently
--- Quote ---Instead, the vast majority stayed, accepting a big loss this year and an even bigger loss come January, rather than a temporary, much smaller loss for a few weeks in June. We own the content. The agencies are nothing without us. But whatevs.
--- End quote ---
and again, you're mis-stating the case by presenting it as either /or rather than a large loss for everyone AND a slightly larger loss for boycotters
--- End quote ---
Well, today's a sad day for me. I just read in the Stock Coalition Facebook group that your work is featured in the Coalition Collection on Pond5. You argue against boycotting and haven't had much nice to say about the Coalition, but you stepped right up to take advantage of the deal they got with Pond5.
So now someone who thinks boycotting Shutterstock is useless reaps the reward of the hard work done by others who sacrificed their income and worked their butts off to try to make a difference.
From now out I'm looking out for number one and nobody else. Because what's the point if my work benefits someone like you? I gave up thousands of dollars in income so YOUR work could be featured while you continue making money on Shutterstock? Ehf that.
--- End quote ---
Wasn't it the case that your work would only get featured on Pond5 if they hadn't (re)activated their work on SS?
cathyslife:
--- Quote from: Shelma1 on September 15, 2020, 16:22 ---
--- Quote from: cascoly on August 31, 2020, 16:59 ---
--- Quote from: Shelma1 on July 30, 2020, 08:42 ---Negative comments because if everyone had sacrificed a few weeks of income SS would have been forced to roll back their draconian royalty cuts and we'd ALL be back to higher royalties.
--- End quote ---
but that was NEVER going to happen - boycotts never get that sort of cooperation and a boycott with a publicly stated end date tells the boycotted they can ride it out. In addition, the vast majority of contributors likely never even knew there was a boycott.
that still doesnt excuse the negative comments and ad hominem attacks on those who think differently
--- Quote ---Instead, the vast majority stayed, accepting a big loss this year and an even bigger loss come January, rather than a temporary, much smaller loss for a few weeks in June. We own the content. The agencies are nothing without us. But whatevs.
--- End quote ---
and again, you're mis-stating the case by presenting it as either /or rather than a large loss for everyone AND a slightly larger loss for boycotters
--- End quote ---
Well, today's a sad day for me. I just read in the Stock Coalition Facebook group that your work is featured in the Coalition Collection on Pond5. You argue against boycotting and haven't had much nice to say about the Coalition, but you stepped right up to take advantage of the deal they got with Pond5.
So now someone who thinks boycotting Shutterstock is useless reaps the reward of the hard work done by others who sacrificed their income and worked their butts off to try to make a difference.
From now out I'm looking out for number one and nobody else. Because what's the point if my work benefits someone like you? I gave up thousands of dollars in income so YOUR work could be featured while you continue making money on Shutterstock? Ehf that.
--- End quote ---
Yep. Don’t blame you.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version