Author Topic: SS - Important notice about contributor payouts (Read 47450 times)

FlowerPower · « **Reply #100 on:** January 25, 2016, 17:16 »

EL we will get a % now not a flat rate. 30% for top level that most people are. As your lifetime earnings increase, the amount you earn per download increases, too. The new people who work for nothing will make it harder to get to where we are. While people don't like change and only see bad side, percentage is the business way to pay us, not fixed number.

Too many new people willing to work for low pay. Too many people willing to sell on terrible agency like DP or Veer for some pittance. Message to agencies is we will take any low pay and keep working for chicken feed and scraps.

I don't have hardly the ELs that I used to get. I read that over many times for people here. EL isn't what they used to be. Means I like the 30% as a raise, don't care about the change.

Stu99 · « **Reply #101 on:** January 25, 2016, 17:40 »

I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.

farbled · « **Reply #102 on:** January 25, 2016, 17:43 »

Quote from: Stu99 on January 25, 2016, 17:40

I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.

Did it show under SOD? I got a 30 dollar SOD (as well as some really good ones) today too.

Hongover · « **Reply #103 on:** January 25, 2016, 17:45 »

Quote from: farbled on January 25, 2016, 17:43

Quote from: Stu99 on January 25, 2016, 17:40
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.

Did it show under SOD? I got a 30 dollar SOD (as well as some really good ones) today too.

That's good news for veterans so far. If there are more people buying 2-packs, the EL average could be higher for some people.

Stu99 · « **Reply #104 on:** January 25, 2016, 18:03 »

Quote from: farbled on January 25, 2016, 17:43

Quote from: Stu99 on January 25, 2016, 17:40
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.

Did it show under SOD? I got a 30 dollar SOD (as well as some really good ones) today too.

It showed up under EL, not SOD.

Hildegarde · « **Reply #105 on:** January 25, 2016, 18:19 »

Quote

Otherwise, the news on EL are definitely bad for most of us and perfectly clear to explain (i.e. their recent open of the floodgate due to new acceptance policy of 1/10). I guess they realized they are loosing the market share quickly and have to stabilize and/or catch up with other agencies.

It seems to me that if they are losing market share, it makes more sense to fix their bogus review process than to do this or change the application to lower standards. But of course hiring people costs money so better to short change the contributors than hire/train more people to review.

Tryingmybest · « **Reply #106 on:** January 25, 2016, 18:22 »

Article by Lee Torrens (sorry if it was already posted)

http://www.microstockdiaries.com/shutterstock-cuts-royalties.html

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #107 on:** January 25, 2016, 18:30 »

Quote from: Stu99 on January 25, 2016, 17:40

I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.

Did you get $29.85 or $30? I ask because 30% of 99.50 ( the current price of the 2-pack in the US) is $29.85. Possibly if the purchase were made in another country, the price amounted to $100 when converted into USD, but nice round numbers on currency conversions suggest shenanigans with the exchange rate

Stu99 · « **Reply #108 on:** January 25, 2016, 19:35 »

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on January 25, 2016, 18:30

Quote from: Stu99 on January 25, 2016, 17:40
I just got my first EL under the new structure, I got $30.

Did you get $29.85 or $30? I ask because 30% of 99.50 ( the current price of the 2-pack in the US) is $29.85. Possibly if the purchase were made in another country, the price amounted to $100 when converted into USD, but nice round numbers on currency conversions suggest shenanigans with the exchange rate

It was a $30.00 EL

steheap · « **Reply #109 on:** January 25, 2016, 19:53 »

I just got an enhanced download and was paid $20.40 and I'm just about to hit the $50K earnings threshold

Steve

anathaya · « **Reply #110 on:** January 26, 2016, 00:08 »

The next step will be reducing EL prices.

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #111 on:** January 26, 2016, 01:37 »

Quote from: anathaya on January 26, 2016, 00:08

The next step will be reducing EL prices.

I got that impression from the initial email. It gives them flexibility to "drive more downloads" by charging lower prices rather than having to stay above $28+X to maintain their margin.

anathaya · « **Reply #112 on:** January 26, 2016, 02:26 »

Quote from: steheap on January 25, 2016, 19:53

I just got an enhanced download and was paid $20.40 and I'm just about to hit the $50K earnings threshold

Steve

$50K!!! You mean $50,000/month?

skubai · « **Reply #113 on:** January 26, 2016, 03:21 »

No change for me here. Just got 28 for EL and 27 for SOD. But I did not get the email so that might be it.

spamowanka · « **Reply #114 on:** January 26, 2016, 04:35 »

two Enhanced Downloads for me yesterday, first was $28, second $28,50

Perry · « **Reply #115 on:** January 26, 2016, 04:40 »

That email has the nasty smell of IStockphoto.

BaldricksTrousers · « **Reply #116 on:** January 26, 2016, 04:52 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on January 25, 2016, 16:00

Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2016, 15:56
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?

Surely it's not about being old-timers, it's about having a track record of producing stuff people want to buy. One person might have 100 images sitting there from 2004 and still be on the bottom earnings tier while another who started uploading six months ago could already have reached the top tier if he or she is really, really good.

bolsher · « **Reply #117 on:** January 26, 2016, 05:20 »

First ss enhanced download today. FOR 17,50$

Pauws99 · « **Reply #118 on:** January 26, 2016, 06:01 »

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 26, 2016, 04:52

Quote from: Pauws99 on January 25, 2016, 16:00
Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2016, 15:56
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
Surely it's not about being old-timers, it's about having a track record of producing stuff people want to buy. One person might have 100 images sitting there from 2004 and still be on the bottom earnings tier while another who started uploading six months ago could already have reached the top tier if he or she is really, really good.

Thanks I can see the Logic of that as a kind of incentive for producing marketable work but does create a perverse logic that it is in the interests of the supplier to encourage customers to go to lower tier supplier's images.

Zero Talent · « **Reply #119 on:** January 26, 2016, 06:11 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on January 26, 2016, 06:01

Quote from: BaldricksTrousers on January 26, 2016, 04:52
Quote from: Pauws99 on January 25, 2016, 16:00
Quote from: Microstockphoto on January 25, 2016, 15:56
no one said or insinuated that
Well Shutterstock and other sites seem to think so?
Surely it's not about being old-timers, it's about having a track record of producing stuff people want to buy. One person might have 100 images sitting there from 2004 and still be on the bottom earnings tier while another who started uploading six months ago could already have reached the top tier if he or she is really, really good.
Thanks I can see the Logic of that as a kind of incentive for producing marketable work but does create a perverse logic that it is in the interests of the supplier to encourage customers to go to lower tier supplier's images.

Their interrest is to keep the customers happy by presenting them the best photos available.
If they start playing games, as you suggest, customers will notice and leave, going to agencies with better search algorithms, able to offer a better product.
Their foremost incentive is to keep their customers loyal and happy.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Justanotherphotographer · « **Reply #120 on:** January 26, 2016, 06:15 »

Quote from: Pauws99 on January 25, 2016, 15:52

Why do "vets" consider they should get more than "newbies" anyway.........? Just curious don't want to start a war

It really, really, isn't about vets getting more. It's about newer people getting less. Everyone should be getting more, but the agencies are constantly looking for ways to save by paying out less to everyone, but especially newer people because they will take less in the hope of earning a bit more in future at higher tiers.

Wait a few months and you will see, everyone will be making less from ELs, newer people less than vets true but the agencies bank on them continuing to upload so they can aim for the few pennies more they will see at higher tiers.

BigLeague · « **Reply #121 on:** January 26, 2016, 06:17 »

So I assume the price of EL's to SS customers didn't change? just our rate? And some excuse that as we are taking less of a cut, it allows them to sell more?

Obviously they don't like to engage in conversation these days, because they just cant justify what they do without annoying everyone. I assume the mentality is, "if we don't engage, the quicker it will be accepted" that's what I would do if I was doing something negative and unjustifiable to people.

It would be really nice to see someone man up and just be adult about it, and say "yes its a unfortunate but it is a reduction in revenue for contributors".

We should be able to demand some information, after all we are employing SS to represent our images to customers, for a percentage of the sales. They sell our goods for US. If we all decided not to contribute a single new image for a week, i'm sure that would open up some dialogue.

Svetlana · « **Reply #122 on:** January 26, 2016, 06:24 »

SS can now offer whatever custom deals for ELs they like. No matter how small the price is, SS is now paying the author a percentage, and not flat 28$ for each EL.
I think that's what the previous lack of flexibility mentioned in the letter meant. Either that or they're going to make standard EL tariffs lower for the client.

sharpshot · « **Reply #123 on:** January 26, 2016, 06:25 »

Quote from: BigLeague on January 26, 2016, 06:17

...If we all decided not to contribute a single new image for a week, i'm sure that would open up some dialogue.

Unfortunately, we wont do that, been tried before and not enough people do it. I don't think it would make any difference anyway, they have so many images now, one week of not uploading is insignificant.

Perhaps the best thing we can do is ask buyers to use the few sites that haven't cut commissions below 50%?

MxR · « **Reply #124 on:** January 26, 2016, 06:27 »

if shutterstock still so bad treating to contributors would happen what happened to iStock.

Deactivation day ??

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: SS - Important notice about contributor payouts (Read 47450 times)

FlowerPower

Stu99

farbled

Hongover

Stu99

Hildegarde

Tryingmybest

Jo Ann Snover

Stu99

steheap

anathaya

Justanotherphotographer

anathaya

skubai

spamowanka

Perry

BaldricksTrousers

bolsher

Pauws99

Zero Talent

Justanotherphotographer

BigLeague

Svetlana

sharpshot

MxR

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors