MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SS not reporting sales? - Solved  (Read 13938 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: August 22, 2014, 14:09 »
+3
*sigh* After clicking through 30+ pages, I found 4 images (among 600+), some of them even listing the keyword with which they were downloaded. Still, to me this suggests a more innocent explanation, like promotional use...

Thanks for your feedback (+1) so now we can be sure there are files downloaded and not reported.
I didn't agree to sell images for free.

You base your proof only on the wrong numbers in the gallery stats. If those files would not show zero, you would not have detected anything.

Can you be sure that these files (showing zero downloads in gallery stats) have never reported a sale? I.e. have you checked every single day since upload of the file(s) in question in the earnings tab (to my knowledge that's the only way to really see if a specific file was downloaded on shutterstock)?

If not, maybe those sales have been reported, but "only" the numbers of the gallery stats are wrong.

And to gbalex: Assuming that you can get any data out of the shutterstock database with "just a simple database query" is a bold assumption. Given the size of data they have to process and the performance requirements they have, I doubt that data presented to contributors is retreived with simple SQL statements from one big master database...
It's likely a lot more complex, and a lot more likely to include some bugs in a beta-feature.


« Reply #51 on: August 22, 2014, 15:13 »
+2
You base your proof only on the wrong numbers in the gallery stats. If those files would not show zero, you would not have detected anything.

Can you be sure that these files (showing zero downloads in gallery stats) have never reported a sale? I.e. have you checked every single day since upload of the file(s) in question in the earnings tab (to my knowledge that's the only way to really see if a specific file was downloaded on shutterstock)?

If not, maybe those sales have been reported, but "only" the numbers of the gallery stats are wrong.

True, files with 1+ downloads are nearly impossible to track and nobody could prove anything only with them. But yes I check stats every day, and new images with no sales are easy to follow, specially with a small portfolio. Sales were never reported unfortunately.


« Reply #53 on: August 22, 2014, 15:39 »
+3
Thanks Scott for the prompt reply.

But how can a image with no sales have keywords relevance?
Is the Image Gallery Stats not working properly?

Please let us know when you have more information about it.

« Reply #54 on: August 23, 2014, 07:25 »
0
I gave up relying on keyword stats per image.

On an average day 90% of my downloads have no keywords attached and i have a hard time believing someone stumbled on the images all the time browsing categories or random clicking instead of entering a search time so i concluded its unreliable.

Shame as it would be nice to know with accuracy which keywords are and aren't working.

I don't think it impacts on sales, merely the display to the submitter isn't and never has worked.


MxR

« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2014, 09:54 »
+10
Hello All,

Thanks for your questions.

A royalty payment is made for every paid license of Shutterstock product. One of the benefits of working with Shutterstock is that, as a publicly-traded company on the New York Stock Exchange, we are audited by major accounting firms.  Our downloads, licenses, and royalty payouts go through multiple layers of scrutiny to ensure that they are correct, and the officers of the company certify the results of those audits as our financial numbers are reported to the public.

As far as the sort orders are concerned, I'm looking into it, but [I believe] what you're seeing is potentially the result of search testing.  Search tests are typically run with a small percentage of the user population.  If a test results in more customer downloads, it would be adopted more broadly.  The goal of testing is to increase customer downloads, which ultimately delivers more royalties to contributors. 

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock
poor lighting...

« Reply #56 on: August 23, 2014, 10:14 »
+14
Hello All,

Thanks for your questions.

A royalty payment is made for every paid license of Shutterstock product. One of the benefits of working with Shutterstock is that, as a publicly-traded company on the New York Stock Exchange, we are audited by major accounting firms.  Our downloads, licenses, and royalty payouts go through multiple layers of scrutiny to ensure that they are correct, and the officers of the company certify the results of those audits as our financial numbers are reported to the public.

As far as the sort orders are concerned, I'm looking into it, but [I believe] what you're seeing is potentially the result of search testing.  Search tests are typically run with a small percentage of the user population.  If a test results in more customer downloads, it would be adopted more broadly.  The goal of testing is to increase customer downloads, which ultimately delivers more royalties to contributors. 

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock
poor lighting...
+1
And the focus is not where we think it should be.

Beppe Grillo

« Reply #57 on: August 23, 2014, 10:55 »
0
I don't understand why from the contributor side I see the "undiscovered" option in my portfolio (with other three options), but different persons told me that from the customer side this option is not present when searching in a specific portfolio.
So if it is like this it is completely useless, no?
« Last Edit: August 23, 2014, 11:02 by Beppe Grillo »

« Reply #58 on: August 23, 2014, 10:59 »
+2
Hello All,

Thanks for your questions.

A royalty payment is made for every paid license of Shutterstock product. One of the benefits of working with Shutterstock is that, as a publicly-traded company on the New York Stock Exchange, we are audited by major accounting firms.  Our downloads, licenses, and royalty payouts go through multiple layers of scrutiny to ensure that they are correct, and the officers of the company certify the results of those audits as our financial numbers are reported to the public.

As far as the sort orders are concerned, I'm looking into it, but [I believe] what you're seeing is potentially the result of search testing. 

Search tests are typically run with a small percentage of the user population.  If a test results in more customer downloads, it would be adopted more broadly.  The goal of testing is to increase customer downloads, which ultimately delivers more royalties to contributors. 

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock

Could you please explain why a search test which does result in downloads does not record or write those downloads for the image that has been downloaded to your database field "Total Purchases".

And you could you please explain why the sort order by download is not correct.

<th id="downloads" class="sortable sort_desc">
<a href="gallery.mhtml?sort_direction=desc&amp;sort_order=downloads">Total Purchases[/url]
<div class="sort_order"></div>
</th>

« Reply #59 on: August 23, 2014, 13:20 »
+5
Hello All,

Thanks for your questions.

A royalty payment is made for every paid license of Shutterstock product. One of the benefits of working with Shutterstock is that, as a publicly-traded company on the New York Stock Exchange, we are audited by major accounting firms.  Our downloads, licenses, and royalty payouts go through multiple layers of scrutiny to ensure that they are correct, and the officers of the company certify the results of those audits as our financial numbers are reported to the public.

As far as the sort orders are concerned, I'm looking into it, but [I believe] what you're seeing is potentially the result of search testing.  Search tests are typically run with a small percentage of the user population.  If a test results in more customer downloads, it would be adopted more broadly.  The goal of testing is to increase customer downloads, which ultimately delivers more royalties to contributors. 

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock

I believe you. I have been with Shutterstock for 9 years, and you are the last stock company I am still with because of the reasons previously mentioned: your site is reliable, there have not been any shenanigans with payments, etc. You have been solid.

But one thing I do want to say is that there are PLENTY of companies out there that are a publicly-traded company on the New York Stock Exchange, and are audited by major accounting firms, and yet people still get bilked out of money. That used to be a statement that would instill confidence. Today? Not so much.

Favete

  • designer | illustrator
« Reply #60 on: August 25, 2014, 02:31 »
+7
I think SS is working on search optomisation, because while some people are reporting that summer months are worst ever, others are happy with lots of sales. And all of that doesn't sound right.
As for me, August is pretty much disspointing, it has some more days to make it right, but the first half sound like it's Saturday day after day.

« Reply #61 on: August 26, 2014, 01:29 »
+5
I guess the major accounting firms does not audit SS site codes!  ;)

« Reply #62 on: August 26, 2014, 08:00 »
+5
However and whatever they've done I will be $300 down over my average this month. All of a sudden, very few OD's, low subs and minimal special sales. VERY VERY discouraging.

« Reply #63 on: August 26, 2014, 08:14 »
+3
However and whatever they've done I will be $300 down over my average this month. All of a sudden, very few OD's, low subs and minimal special sales. VERY VERY discouraging.

I agree, something is rotten in the state of SS. As you said, fewer sales, almost no ODs, let alone SDs. Not only do I sell fewer photos, but also WHAT is selling seems weird to me: If something sells it's probably some obscure and quite old photo, my proven bestsellers are quite dead in August.

Additionally I have three photos (out of ten) stuck in the review queue for more than a week now - that never has happened to me before in the eight years I'm with SS.

Phadrea

    This user is banned.
« Reply #64 on: August 26, 2014, 08:47 »
0
So if most of us are reporting terrible sales (if any at all) what benefit is all this to SS ? They need telling really.

« Reply #65 on: August 26, 2014, 08:55 »
+1
I agree, something is rotten in the state of SS.

It certainly is... I'm not seeing decline of sales but I do see a lot of new files messed up in the Image Gallery Stats. We can hope it's a bug and SS reports the alleged sales or at least be able to provide a reasonable explanation to why the search and sale reports are not working properly.

Because the only reply given by Scott so far lack Focus - subject is blurry, too soft, or out of focus.

cuppacoffee

« Reply #66 on: August 26, 2014, 09:00 »
+3
So if most of us are reporting terrible sales (if any at all) what benefit is all this to SS ? They need telling really.

Most of us? Most of us here that take the time to comment maybe, but many MSG members lurk and do not post in these forums. Taken as a whole there are far more contributors at SS then are members of this forum. For everyone not getting sales, someone else is.


BoBoBolinski

« Reply #67 on: August 26, 2014, 10:11 »
+3

" For everyone not getting sales, someone else is."


This is the same old nonsense that IS peddle. If anyone says anything not positive some IS cheerleader will chip in to suggest that those doing well say nothing. My experience is that those saying nothing are doing equally badly, they are just so dispirited they can't be bothered.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2014, 10:16 by BoBoBolinski »

Valo

« Reply #68 on: August 26, 2014, 10:32 »
+2
Newbies have no benchmark, they will think they do well, but have no idea of the heydays, they will report good sales and high percentages. Making 50 dollar this month and 100 dollar next month is 100% growth. Making 1000 dollar this month and 1100 dollar next month is 10% growth. 50 dollar is 100% in one case, and 100 dollar is 10% in the other case.

Long time contributors have a benchmark, they will know better if they do well or not, and I don't think the big players will come out and say such things here in a forum or elsewhere for that matter. The only one who did that was Yuri and my guess is, he won't come out again saying he isn't doing well Getty.

One thing is certain, we will not get back the heydays.

Another thing is certain, it is impossible for everyone to see the same amount of growth and success as a few years ago. Simply because there are more images accepted then ever. A few years ago it was around 90,000 images per week. Now it is close to 300,000 images per week, referring to Shutterstock. The contributor base doubled in about 3 years but the paid out earnings did not.

Shutterstock is doing better then ever, in terms of library growth and revenue growth, but the earnings are spread thinner every month for individual contributors. People will make less and less, and it will be harder to keep up, yet Shutterstock will never state that sales per individual have gone down. The only comment they will keep repeating is that they have paid out more earnings than ever. Sure.  ::)


« Reply #69 on: August 26, 2014, 10:33 »
+1

" For everyone not getting sales, someone else is."


This is the same old nonsense that IS peddle. If anyone says anything not positive some IS cheerleader will chip in to suggest that those doing well say nothing. My experience is that those saying nothing are doing equally badly, they are just so dispirited they can't be bothered.

+1
blame it on upbringing.  when as a child TV is blasting u with "don't worry be happy" ..., "put on a happy face " ...  shoeless beggar being grateful while looking at another beggar with no legs, etc...

the SS IS cheerleader ms-tocker is that shoeless beggar exemplifying contentment , looking up to his'her SS-IS deity saying, "at least I still have my legs !!!"...

for now
...  while his/her colleagues have long gone jumped off the cliff ;)

« Reply #70 on: August 26, 2014, 10:38 »
0

Because the only reply given by Scott so far lack Focus - subject is blurry, too soft, or out of focus.

correction :
i think the actual wording is something to the effect of ...

focus is not where we think it should be ;)

ShadySue

« Reply #71 on: August 26, 2014, 10:47 »
+2
The iS-cheerleader has regenerated and feels his old posts weren't relevant any more, so deleted them.
I don't think there are any more in msg. Even the main one on iS is quivering a bit.

« Reply #72 on: August 26, 2014, 11:02 »
-4
The iS-cheerleader has regenerated and feels his old posts weren't relevant any more, so deleted them.
I don't think there are any more in msg. Even the main one on iS is quivering a bit.
Ha.  I see you're still trolling on here.  I don't think I said the posts weren't relevant, I thought moving on and restarting with more focus on the important things was what I should do.  I've moved on, maybe it's time for you to do the same?  Hopefully you have more to offer than just trying to insult other people here?
« Last Edit: August 26, 2014, 11:06 by Audi 5000 »

ShadySue

« Reply #73 on: August 26, 2014, 11:14 »
+7
The iS-cheerleader has regenerated and feels his old posts weren't relevant any more, so deleted them.
I don't think there are any more in msg. Even the main one on iS is quivering a bit.
Ha.  I see you're still trolling on here.  I don't think I said the posts weren't relevant, I thought moving on and restarting with more focus on the important things was what I should do.  I've moved on, maybe it's time for you to do the same?  Hopefully you have more to offer than just trying to insult other people here?

Sorry, did I mention you?
But if the cap fits ...

« Reply #74 on: August 26, 2014, 11:14 »
-5
The iS-cheerleader has regenerated and feels his old posts weren't relevant any more, so deleted them.
I don't think there are any more in msg. Even the main one on iS is quivering a bit.
Ha.  I see you're still trolling on here.  I don't think I said the posts weren't relevant, I thought moving on and restarting with more focus on the important things was what I should do.  I've moved on, maybe it's time for you to do the same?  Hopefully you have more to offer than just trying to insult other people here?

Sorry, did I mention you?
But if the cap fits ...
Ok, you're added to my ignore list.  I have no desire to argue with trolls.   You can continue your insults without me.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2014, 11:43 by Audi 5000 »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
57 Replies
9466 Views
Last post April 25, 2014, 04:38
by gostwyck
19 Replies
3754 Views
Last post June 10, 2014, 18:58
by emblem
24 Replies
3848 Views
Last post February 16, 2016, 17:29
by Red On
Pond5 Sales Reporting

Started by stockVid « 1 2  All » Pond5

48 Replies
11898 Views
Last post April 17, 2016, 00:40
by thepokergod
11 Replies
2636 Views
Last post August 28, 2016, 14:02
by Minsc

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results