Contributors may not be happy, but stockholders are.
https://www.equities.com/news/shutterstock-inc-sstk-hits-new-52-week-high-during-august-11-session

Doesn't look so i impressive when you look at the longer term chart.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=SSTK#symbol=SSTK;range=5y

new highs don't mean squat to any investor other than the gullible.
it's the usual stock market spin ...
i don't know how many times i read the headline "new highs" after the stock market crash,
only to double check that most stock holders have already lost their pants; wives, mistresses,
..going from Prada to Nada.
in the end, no matter how many times they reached "new highs", none of these top performers
came closed to breaking even after 20 years.

iow, it's like (a) contributor(s) of ss coming in msg , amidst reports of 50 % shortfall by many experienced contributors, to say, "what crisis??? for the past year, i have been consistently
getting BDE, BME and last two years BYE in a row... after having close to zero sales before that
 

I'm an iStock exclusive, but I have been trading in SSTK shares for a while, as a hedge against iStock's declining market share. My current position is 100 shares at an average cost of $42.47. So at today's closing of $61.16 I've gained 44% in a few months. Can't complain. I've had larger positions in SSTK in the past and sold out when I was ahead. The stock seems to have a lot of positive momentum in the last few months, hence the steady climb upwards. Had I had a crystal ball and knew where SSTK's stock price was going, I would have bought a lot more shares. For all I know it could have kept dropping, hence the hesitation in buying more.

Though in general, it is hard to lose money in the stock market in the last few months, as most stocks have all being moving higher, except energy relate stocks, and perhaps banking. A lot of those have been doing poorly.

i'm thrilled. 

They've fartled around and made the stock jump.  whoopee. 

Typical corporate mistaking image for substance.  A stock jump won't last unless the company actually does something for it.  If Shutterstock doesn't get their machine working properly, the stock will go back down.  Sure, it can be fluffed up again by more finagling, but only for so long. It's not a perpetual motion machine.  If you keep jiggling it to get better figures, it will eventually break.

Quote from: sharpshot on August 15, 2016, 14:35

Doesn't look so i impressive when you look at the longer term chart.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=SSTK#symbol=SSTK;range=5y

What caused that huge drop during mid-august of 2015?

Adobe Stock?

I think they were just hugely over priced when they floated. Jon kept (keeps?) trying to sell it as a tech company rather than an image licensing company and tech stocks typically have crazy pe ratios

definitely. all "naked" as they call it in japan stock market finance jargon... (window - dressing)
with all the "incredible high tech stuff" that's been introduced lately, (cough cough)...
of course, not reporting the hiccups , missed reporting of sales, shortfall of earnings,
disappearance of top sellers, portfolio falling off the cliff at a flip switch, etc...at the contributor level

cathyslife says it better than i do, so i deleted aforementioned....and paste this from the other thread

(quote)I love it when they say they are investing heavily in upgrading the technology, but all the upgrading does is break stuff that was working just fine before the expensive upgrade. I also love it when they try to make us think it will be of some benefit to us, when all it is designed to do is make them billionaires instead of millionaires.(unquote)

I also wonder how long they can try and sell it as a tech company when the "tech" keeps breaking. That was supposed to be their USP. Other sites had the same or better content but ss had the tech savy to deliver what the client wanted front and center.

agree.
when ss went public, we were buying based on the good will and strong trustworthy reputation built by Jon Oringer of the old shutterstock we contributors helped to make #1 and were proud to be part of.

that shutterstock is not the same shutterstock we know today,
.. let's not fill the list of f**kups , that have been happening these years since it went public...
never mind just the past 2 years or so.
that would stretch out as many pages of paper trail from ss forum and here...

and no matter how much damage control you can spin, the most recently emails alone
are enough to make anyone form their own opinion of what i just said.

May be getting close to the time to "short" their stock.

When the boneheads are buyinG stocks, the shrewd are selling

exactly --- that's the way it is.

There's one thing it means for traders though, and that would be going short on the stuff. (Even if, indeed, it isn't an all-time high, a 52-wk high is usually "good enough" as well -- particularly in the overall market situation :) and the fundamental situation of a microstock agency like SSTK in particular...)

Will look into this further -- nice to find trading info even here on MSG ;)

---

EDIT: Having looked at it a bit more closely, a P/E of 108 is really outlandish -- reminds me of 2001 when every would-be Yuppie and their grandmom were running worthless stock companies. (The rest is history...) So, indeed, SSTK appears to be a great candidate to go short on :)

"hits a new high" ??  just about as interesting as watching paint dry.

I became convinced long ago that stock market prices are divorced from reality, especially now with the computerized high-speed trading... it's about the traders, has nothing to do with Shutterstock or its intrinsic value. Not anymore.

Quote from: suwanneeredhead on August 18, 2016, 15:48

I became convinced long ago that stock market prices are divorced from reality, especially now with the computerized high-speed trading... it's about the traders, has nothing to do with Shutterstock or its intrinsic value. Not anymore.

Until the bubble bursts........

again