pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: SSTK Q2 2017 poor results  (Read 14496 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 02, 2017, 12:34 »
0
Shutterstock released their second quarter 2017 results and they are miserable, which is why they're down 17% on NYSE today.

Their results in a nutshell:

Revenue increased 8% to $134.0 million
Income from operations decreased 69% to $3.3 million
Net income decreased 58% to $3.1 million
Adjusted EBITDA decreased 19% to $18.3 million
Diluted EPS decreased 55% to $0.09 per share
Key Operating Metrics             

Paid downloads decreased 2%
Revenue per download increased 9%
Image collection expanded 57% to 144.7 million images
Video collection expanded 55% to 7.6 million clips

More on: http://investor.shutterstock.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=251362&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2290950

Struck by their explanation of the plummeted income from operations: "driven by an increase in operating expenses primarily due to higher royalty costs associated with increased levels of revenue, increased spend in marketing and increased administrative expenses." My royalties at SS are the lowest during the last four or 5 months in the last 2 years, despite constant and significant increase of my portfolio.

Similarly, explanation for low net income: "due to the decline in operating performance and a higher-effective tax rate, which was partly offset by non-operating transactional gains related to foreign currency as compared to the second quarter of 2016." Time to start worrying about the "leading global technology company offering a creative platform for high-quality assets, tools and services", with their own outlook in mind:

"The Company's current expectations for the full year 2017, reduced from those previously announced, are as follows:

Revenue of $535-545 million, down from $545-560 million
Income from Operations of $30-40 million, down from $47-52 million
Adjusted EBITDA of $85-$95 million, down from $105-110 million
Non-cash equity-based compensation expense of approximately $30 million
Effective tax rate in mid-30's%
Capital Expenditures of approximately $45 million, including capitalized labor of approximately $20 million"


Bad Company

« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2017, 12:45 »
+16
just hope SS doesn't send us an email- "Dear Contributors in an effort to increase your sales we will need to reduce your commission rates to spend the additional savings on more marketing"  :(


derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2017, 13:36 »
+3
Not surprised at all!

drd

« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2017, 13:43 »
+13
Shutterstock released their second quarter 2017 results and they are miserable, which is why they're down 17% on NYSE today.

This data is Second Quarter 2017 highlights as compared to Second Quarter 2016. Which means within one year they have almost doubled their image and video collection, but revenue is up by only 8%. The market is oversaturated with cheap images.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2017, 14:02 by drd »

Shelma1

« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2017, 13:46 »
+19
...and according to this phone conference, the number of subscription dls per buyer dropped and dls are down. So fewer dls and 57% more images means we're not crazy when we complain about a huge decrease in sales. Doesn't look good for the future.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4093753-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-q2-2017-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=3

drd

« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2017, 13:54 »
+2
...and according to this phone conference, the number of subscription dls per buyer dropped and dls are down. So fewer dls and 57% more images means we're not crazy when we complain about a huge decrease in sales. Doesn't look good for the future.

...and add to that an 11% customer base growth.

« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2017, 14:49 »
+3
did they say how many of the vultures short their stocks in anticipation for a killing ???
or how many of those who insisted on $cr*wing the contributors have already taken profit and now gone to another stock
to cannibalize???

not to forget their employees benefit. time for another bunch of good husbands to announce they are going to "quit" to  "spend more time with family"  ;)

Bad Company

« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2017, 15:15 »
+3
Interesting salaries there- plus $10,000 to $30,000 yearly bonuses...

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Shutterstock/Salary

ShadySue

« Reply #8 on: August 02, 2017, 15:49 »
+1
...and according to this phone conference, the number of subscription dls per buyer dropped and dls are down.
Isn't it better for them when the buyers take fewer dls from their subs, as they haven't had to pay out to contributors.
Unless they don't renew.
But I see they're going to start smaller packages, presumably charging more per dl. Are they going to share that with the contributors?

« Reply #9 on: August 02, 2017, 16:08 »
+2
Stand by for a good shafting it'll be coming soon  :'(

I reckon it'll make what iS/Gty did to us look like a walk in the park.

Shelma1

« Reply #10 on: August 02, 2017, 16:33 »
+5
...and according to this phone conference, the number of subscription dls per buyer dropped and dls are down.
Isn't it better for them when the buyers take fewer dls from their subs, as they haven't had to pay out to contributors.
Unless they don't renew.
But I see they're going to start smaller packages, presumably charging more per dl. Are they going to share that with the contributors?

They're already offering smaller subs packs, which is what led to fewer dls per buyer. Whatever changes they're making aren't having positive results for anyone, it seems...not even them.

« Reply #11 on: August 02, 2017, 21:30 »
+3
just hope SS doesn't send us an email- "Dear Contributors in an effort to increase your sales we will need to reduce your commission rates to spend the additional savings on more marketing"  :(

Predictions all based on stock earnings reports, doom and gloom, while Getty tells us how money won't make us happy as they slash our commissions. Then change and discount us more. Predictions are not reality, IS has stabbed us in the heart, stole our promised contracts, and some people keep defending their raping us? How many times have we read the same about SS and never had a cut? More than that, they have added new ways to market our work.

IS flat rate subs on StinkStock, or does everyone just accept that without question because the * deal has been going on for so long.

Maybe people who don't like SS should go sign up for Deposit Photos and get the real feeling of trouble and degrading treatment.

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #12 on: August 03, 2017, 00:22 »
+2
did they say how many of the vultures short their stocks in anticipation for a killing ???
or how many of those who insisted on $cr*wing the contributors have already taken profit and now gone to another stock
to cannibalize???

not to forget their employees benefit. time for another bunch of good husbands to announce they are going to "quit" to  "spend more time with family"  ;)

quoting: Cannibalizing other sites!!   and thats exactly whats happening, there are many examples without mentioning any names!

« Reply #13 on: August 03, 2017, 01:03 »
+2
Oh dear, that's bad news. It's pretty much the last man standing among the sites I've supplied. I guess we're approaching "game over".

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #14 on: August 03, 2017, 01:08 »
+1
Oh dear, that's bad news. It's pretty much the last man standing among the sites I've supplied. I guess we're approaching "game over".

Not sure Simon?? something happened there. Yesterday it was like being back to normal over 100 bucks in daily earnings and without any EL's. Something might have changed??  hang in there

« Reply #15 on: August 03, 2017, 01:22 »
+1
It does seem highly likely that we will end up paying if they can't keep their shareholders happy.  The best case scenario might be for the share price to collapse and Oringer take the business private again.  Things like that never seem to happen to microstock sites.  My fear is that a hedge fund, possibly the same one that owns Getty, might see this as an opportunity.  SS was the one site that kept me motivated with microstock but that clanged when they took over BigStock and cut commissions and then announced their IPO.

« Reply #16 on: August 03, 2017, 02:23 »
+1
It's more likely Oringer will be ousted in a corporate coup and replaced with a bean counter
« Last Edit: August 03, 2017, 13:29 by Sammy the Cat »


« Reply #17 on: August 03, 2017, 02:36 »
+1
Poor by shareholder standards, but they're pretty decent. I don't think they can keep growing the way they did since the market is struggle to grow any larger than it already is. I just hope they don't cut contributor rates in the future.

« Reply #18 on: August 03, 2017, 03:33 »
+3
The boat is sinking....? :'(

MxR

« Reply #19 on: August 03, 2017, 03:42 »
+4
Is exacly same bars like mine but ten times higer!

drd

« Reply #20 on: August 03, 2017, 04:17 »
0
Poor by shareholder standards, but they're pretty decent. I don't think they can keep growing the way they did since the market is struggle to grow any larger than it already is. I just hope they don't cut contributor rates in the future.

The market doesn't grow as the buying power hasn't changed since few years back. Lowering contributor rates would be just another shoot in the foot as sales numbers will not increase, whatever they forecast!

derek

    This user is banned.
« Reply #21 on: August 03, 2017, 06:57 »
0
It does seem highly likely that we will end up paying if they can't keep their shareholders happy.  The best case scenario might be for the share price to collapse and Oringer take the business private again.  Things like that never seem to happen to microstock sites.  My fear is that a hedge fund, possibly the same one that owns Getty, might see this as an opportunity.  SS was the one site that kept me motivated with microstock but that clanged when they took over BigStock and cut commissions and then announced their IPO.

How do we know GI isnt already a big player/shareholder?  it sure is almost a mirror behaviour the way the sites performed lately and with their complete absence saying nothing.
As far as Jon buying it back?  no way I know Jon and he's got his fingers in so many other pies at the moment its unthinkable. I would think this is his last worry.

SS was probably the one site which kept most people going. I was a sucker for it myself up to a couple of years back uploading and uploading as if there was no tomorrow. Oh well. :)

« Reply #22 on: August 03, 2017, 07:12 »
+4
My reading is they have lost sight of the core part of their business ..people need to be able to find images they want to buy and they have lost control of costs......they have been seduced by the consultant talk of shiny new products with higher margins.

« Reply #23 on: August 03, 2017, 07:30 »
0
...and according to this phone conference, the number of subscription dls per buyer dropped and dls are down. So fewer dls and 57% more images means we're not crazy when we complain about a huge decrease in sales. Doesn't look good for the future.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4093753-shutterstocks-sstk-ceo-jonathan-oringer-q2-2017-results-earnings-call-transcript?page=3
I'm not sure anyone said reporting falling sales was crazy just that given the number of uploads and now flat demand you don't need some complex theory about penalising certain contributors to explain it.

« Reply #24 on: August 03, 2017, 07:38 »
0
144.7 million images X 57% annual growth = 1 billion images in less than 5 years.  They had less than 5 million when I started. 

We need to figure our how to compete in a billion image environment.  Or accept being buried.     



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
22 Replies
8602 Views
Last post November 17, 2011, 17:59
by rubyroo
22 Replies
7063 Views
Last post April 15, 2016, 05:53
by OM
13 Replies
2730 Views
Last post July 13, 2016, 01:54
by Pauws99
7 Replies
2108 Views
Last post November 23, 2016, 05:11
by Lana
8 Replies
4444 Views
Last post January 30, 2017, 15:53
by Lecaro

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results