pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS - Important notice about contributor payouts  (Read 34416 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: January 23, 2016, 10:08 »
+5
Rookies got to pay their dues so that OGs get paid better, just like in any business.

Seems like the manipulation worked on you, if that is your take on this...We will all get paid less, even the top tier contributors.


« Reply #51 on: January 23, 2016, 10:34 »
+3
The problem with Fotolia is that they don't accept Editorial images. And their review team is a mess!!!

As opposed to SS' impartial consistency and accuracy in reviewing?

« Reply #52 on: January 23, 2016, 11:09 »
+15
A breathtaking piece of corporate gobbledy-gook.  I don't think we'll ever really know what it meant.  Actually it didn't "mean" anything - other than to announce that we wouldn't be getting $28 anymore, but instead some number derrived from a formula which apparently will not be disclosed.

We don't get 'royalties' anymore, in the sense of a defined payment on a disclosed sale price.  The payouts we receive are, from our point of view, arbitrary.  We don't know what a customer actually paid for a specific download and, in fact, many customers don't know either because they're on subscription plans and the 'price' of individual images could only be calculated long after the fact, because it's based on how many they actually downloaded, what discounts applied, and probably other factors.


« Reply #53 on: January 23, 2016, 11:15 »
+14
For the last two year I am making less and less money with SS. Soon they are not important to me, because I make more with others!

« Reply #54 on: January 23, 2016, 11:36 »
+1
That's a very interesting presentation. I was sort of joking about funding expansion by swiping royalties, but how does the video tie in with that? I'm missing the connection

I could see that you were being flipant. The video was shared in the same vein of grey, grains of truth in each.

« Reply #55 on: January 23, 2016, 11:39 »
+2
I'm afraid the next SS step will be to push low tier contributors up in the search!

They have already done this with other sales and the tiered EL's will further increase profit.

« Reply #56 on: January 23, 2016, 11:59 »
+5
Are we waiting for more info? I thought the announcement covered it. We will be getting the percentages outlined in the pay-scale http://submit.shutterstock.com/payouts under "custom image" resulting in an across the board pay cut for everyone.

Even top tier you only get slightly more in the best possible scenario and much less for the vast majority of EL sales.

It's a shame they can't call it what it is, a massive pay cut.


I don't think they've posted the rates yet. That link is the "current"or old rates. That's the missing link.


They have posted them, but not in the chart, just in the support page on earnings

http://support.shutterstock.com/contributor/articles/kbat02/000006640?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1

If you look at that page a week ago (wayback machine) you can see what it used to say

http://web.archive.org/web/20150905185808/http://support.shutterstock.com/contributor/articles/kbat02/000006640?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1

« Reply #57 on: January 23, 2016, 12:07 »
+5
So same as the custom license tiers and a massive cut across the board. So is this last year's shafting come late or this year's come early? Could we see two in one year? I am at the edge of my seat.

« Reply #58 on: January 23, 2016, 12:23 »
+14
The geniuses at Istock will be flattered to see that SS has followed their example:

1.  Make detrimental-to-suppliers announcement on a Friday afternoon. 
2.  Supply NO notice period.  As I recall, SS always gave at least 30 days notice and this comes into effect Monday.

« Reply #59 on: January 23, 2016, 12:39 »
+1
Hmmm....

"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am New York, NY

Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"

What about Jon's own financial incentives through stocks? Does more money make him a worse performer than he was???

 ::) ;D

Now there's a hypothesis as to why SS needs the extra money - they've agreed to take on the 36th floor of the Empire State Building (25,000 sq feet) in 2016!

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/160113/sstk8-k.html


Jon posted this and a link to a youtube vid not long ago on FB

"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am New York, NY

Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"

Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc

« Reply #60 on: January 23, 2016, 14:08 »
+5
However. I want to add to Beketoff's comment. I've been seeing FT increase and then match SS this year. As of today (2/3 through the month) my sales on FT are 75% higher than SS.
Yes, 75%.

Wow! Do you have the same port in both agencies? I'm reporting much better sales on FT, but it is still only 20-25% of my SS income and I have the same portfolio of 5000 on both. How come there is such huge difference?  :o

wait a little while..

we hate FL a while back with DPC
now they seem to be the new darling  8)

only thing i know is that we don't want this announcement to be the dejavu
of istock and lobo.
if so, our goose is cooked

« Reply #61 on: January 23, 2016, 15:25 »
+2
i did not see a decline in ELs after the license adjustment to 500k.   us 38centers might see the same earnings for EL after 25 jan but this change will make them more money for ELs purchased from lower level contribs. which kind of relates to lowering acceptance rules. increasing images at a lower payout level etc.  benefits them

My FT portfolio is only slightly bigger than at SS (since FT accepts way much more than SS does), but small overall as I started around one year ago (~500 photos on FT). However, FT sales have been accelerating since the beginning of January, have equaled SS's sales in mid-January and exceeded the SS sales by now. Not only sales on FT are more frequent than the ones at SS, they bring considerably higher RPD. Could be a one-time event, or could be a turnaround for FT and demise of SS (in the mid- to long-term), who knows.

« Reply #62 on: January 23, 2016, 15:46 »
+2
Hmmm....

"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am New York, NY

Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"


Artists want to be fairly compensated for their work -- we're not looking for financial incentives to spur us on to produce more and better work. I think we all try to do that even at the pittance we get paid.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #63 on: January 23, 2016, 15:51 »
+3
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am New York, NY

Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"

Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
 ::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
(As some people apparently haven't realised, I'll labour the point that the above was the infamous quote from KKT, justifying Getty's hammering of iS contributors.)
« Last Edit: January 24, 2016, 08:57 by ShadySue »

« Reply #64 on: January 23, 2016, 16:51 »
+6
The geniuses at Istock will be flattered to see that SS has followed their example:
1.  Make detrimental-to-suppliers announcement on a Friday afternoon. 
2.  Supply NO notice period.  As I recall, SS always gave at least 30 days notice and this comes into effect Monday.
Come on SS! You were my last hope for fare business on microstock market.
Don't kill my last hope!!!  >:(

« Reply #65 on: January 23, 2016, 19:21 »
+2
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am New York, NY

Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"

Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: money isn't what makes us happy.
 ::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own scams, don't plagiarise.

yes, of course not... we are , like Zappa says, not in it for the money.
oh, just the other day i was helping my grand child to find some wise saying of different cultures.
imagine my red face when she pointed out to me an ancient chinese saying,
and asked me why "anyone would want to pay peanuts to monkeys"..
"when you pay peanuts you attract monkeys". :'(

« Reply #66 on: January 24, 2016, 05:54 »
+5
The geniuses at Istock will be flattered to see that SS has followed their example:
1.  Make detrimental-to-suppliers announcement on a Friday afternoon. 
2.  Supply NO notice period.  As I recall, SS always gave at least 30 days notice and this comes into effect Monday.
Come on SS! You were my last hope for fare business on microstock market.
Don't kill my last hope!!!  >:(
I think the last hope went years ago when we didn't do enough to deter sites from cutting commissions.  The majority of contributors that weren't prepared to make a stand have left us in this situation.  Sites can keep cutting the amount they pay us, knowing it will just increase their profits.


« Reply #67 on: January 24, 2016, 05:57 »
0
etudiante_rapide: great and exact quotes

« Reply #68 on: January 24, 2016, 08:23 »
+1
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am New York, NY

Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"

Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
 ::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
The video is totally irrelevant to us. It is about employees being given artificial financial incentives for tasks. When you are in our business your sales are a direct indicator of how good you are at your job. We are self employed

« Reply #69 on: January 24, 2016, 09:12 »
+3
"Jon Oringer
January 11 at 10:27am New York, NY

Financial incentives only work well for mechanical non-cognitive tasks....?"

Yeah, well, it's hardly news: we're Artistes: "money isn't what makes us happy".
 ::)
C'mon SS, you want to diss contributors? At least think up your own shtick, don't plagiarise.
The video is totally irrelevant to us. It is about employees being given artificial financial incentives for tasks. When you are in our business your sales are a direct indicator of how good you are at your job. We are self employed

It is relevant when it comes to the army of hobbyists ready to work for free only to see their name mentioned on a magazine or their work liked on social media. SS acknowledged their potential, constantly making efforts to bring them on board.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2016, 09:17 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #70 on: January 24, 2016, 13:44 »
+6
Money, so they say
Is the root of all evil today
But if you ask for a pay rise it's no surprise
That they're giving none away
 ;D

In my previous life it always amused me how people paid far than me would constantly try and argue that money wasn't a motivator.
« Last Edit: January 24, 2016, 13:48 by Pauws99 »

« Reply #71 on: January 24, 2016, 14:00 »
0
i did not see a decline in ELs after the license adjustment to 500k.   us 38centers might see the same earnings for EL after 25 jan but this change will make them more money for ELs purchased from lower level contribs. which kind of relates to lowering acceptance rules. increasing images at a lower payout level etc.  benefits them

My FT portfolio is only slightly bigger than at SS (since FT accepts way much more than SS does), but small overall as I started around one year ago (~500 photos on FT). However, FT sales have been accelerating since the beginning of January, have equaled SS's sales in mid-January and exceeded the SS sales by now. Not only sales on FT are more frequent than the ones at SS, they bring considerably higher RPD. Could be a one-time event, or could be a turnaround for FT and demise of SS (in the mid- to long-term), who knows.
I too have about 500 images, and my experiences with SS and FT mirror this exactly. In fact at the moment, FT $ALES this month are almost twice my FT sales; a trend that has been increasing over the year.

« Reply #72 on: January 24, 2016, 17:51 »
0
I really don't pay attention to this stuff and maybe I should.

Someone dumb it down for me please.

I get a lot of these 38 cent downloads (I think shutterstock should mint a 38 cent coin) and occasionally I get $2+ sales on others (possibly a guy paying for an image he found via a google search?) and still others from people who want to pay a lot of money for uses I never really looked into. I just say "Hey, cool". I think there's a lot of guys like me which is why the micros can do this $$$$.

How does this impact little me? Do I still get a monthly payout?

« Reply #73 on: January 24, 2016, 23:19 »
0
If it doesn't make you feel good, it's probably not good news.

Maybe it sounds simplistic but I totally agree.

Veer didn't work good: Corbis and Veer sold.
Yaymicro sucked: they totally changed.

mmmmh...

« Reply #74 on: January 25, 2016, 06:25 »
0
Hi

The figures I see on SS for Enhanced licences currently are (UK), and contributor cut are...

EL
2 Pack 119   (20%=23.80, 25%=29.75, 30%=35.70)
5 Pack 269  (20%=53.80, 25%=67.20, 30%=80.70)
25 Pack 1019  (20%=203.8, 25%=254.75, 30%=305.70)
I don't know how this works (never checked) in terms of pack numbers, if I have one image in a '2 pack' sale, do I get half of 119?

I don't know if those EL costs are before or after any change though, and then there's the exchange rate...


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
23 Replies
8103 Views
Last post September 19, 2008, 05:44
by Dreamframer
9 Replies
3976 Views
Last post July 28, 2009, 17:48
by johngriffin
9 Replies
2606 Views
Last post April 04, 2012, 16:50
by Smiling Jack
1 Replies
1476 Views
Last post February 07, 2013, 15:12
by EmberMike
5 Replies
2155 Views
Last post August 11, 2015, 05:57
by SandBoxStudio

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle