Author Topic: This is the right moment for SS to intriduce exclusivity! (Read 8819 times)

Dook · « **on:** February 03, 2010, 08:57 »

After all this happening with StockXpert closure and FT comissions, independents are really going to think about going exclusive with IS, once again. I think the only good news could be SS exclusivity. I do not know what are they waiting for?

sharpshot · « **Reply #1 on:** February 03, 2010, 09:32 »

I couldn't agree more. SS need to do something, I am sure there are a lot of us that would love to contribute exclusive images to them. They have been my biggest miscrostock earner and I would like to see them being a strong rival to istock/getty in years to come. If they came up with the right deal, they would soon have an exclusive collection to rival istock.

Fyletto · « **Reply #2 on:** February 03, 2010, 09:39 »

Please, just not total exclusivity... I am for exclusive files option, but in present, Shutterstock is the backbone for independent photographers. With this site exclusive, and giving search advantage to some, I would have to leave micro and head towards macro agencies. Which I do not want.

Giuseppe Parisi · « **Reply #3 on:** February 03, 2010, 09:43 »

I would go exclusive with SS in an instant as they are my main source of income.
I think that it would be a great move... what about to double commissions' values?
That would be nice

tamasvargyasi · « **Reply #4 on:** February 03, 2010, 10:17 »

I would like to go exclusive if they implement this option.

borg · « **Reply #5 on:** February 03, 2010, 10:22 »

No I can't agree with this...

SS is cca 30 % of my total income, this mean that eventual exclusive program need to bring about 70% more...
That is impossible....

Also subscription site doesn't need unique photos from exclusivity they need new, new and new photos....
Exclusivity isn't benefit for them....

Newer is better...

Giuseppe Parisi · « **Reply #6 on:** February 03, 2010, 10:24 »

yep you're probably right...

cthoman · « **Reply #7 on:** February 03, 2010, 10:33 »

Yeah, I'm not sure an exclusive option would work well there. A raise would be nice though.

sharpshot · « **Reply #8 on:** February 03, 2010, 11:06 »

Quote from: borg on February 03, 2010, 10:22

No I can't agree with this...

SS is cca 30 % of my total income, this mean that eventual exclusive program need to bring about 70% more...
That is impossible....

Also subscription site doesn't need unique photos from exclusivity they need new, new and new photos....
Exclusivity isn't benefit for them....

Newer is better...

But they aren't a subscription only site. With StockXpert going, there are only 3 sites selling more pay per download for me now. I think there is a strong possibility that they will close BigStock and move their buyers to SS. I also think that subs buyers are more likely to stay with SS if they have some exclusive content. It is too easy to go to other sites with the same content now.

Klauts · « **Reply #9 on:** February 03, 2010, 11:15 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 03, 2010, 11:06

Quote from: borg on February 03, 2010, 10:22
No I can't agree with this...

SS is cca 30 % of my total income, this mean that eventual exclusive program need to bring about 70% more...
That is impossible....

Also subscription site doesn't need unique photos from exclusivity they need new, new and new photos....
Exclusivity isn't benefit for them....

Newer is better...
But they aren't a subscription only site. With StockXpert going, there are only 3 sites selling more pay per download for me now. I think there is a strong possibility that they will close BigStock and move their buyers to SS. I also think that subs buyers are more likely to stay with SS if they have some exclusive content. It is too easy to go to other sites with the same content now.

The problem is, what will they give the contributors to choose exclusivity?
At the moment, their priciest subscription is 250$/month, that translates to 33c/image.
The top tier is earning 38c. If your SS earnings are 50% of total(I think that's a pretty big number), you'll need double the earnings for the same amount of money. That would bring the top tier to 76c per image. that's 43c loss for SS on each image sold. I know most buyers don't use the full quota but on those numbers they'll have to use less than half for SS just barely make a profit.

One way it could work is if they increased prices, but that may not be the best option right now.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #10 on:** February 03, 2010, 12:16 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 03, 2010, 11:06

But they aren't a subscription only site. With StockXpert going, there are only 3 sites selling more pay per download for me now. I think there is a strong possibility that they will close BigStock and move their buyers to SS. I also think that subs buyers are more likely to stay with SS if they have some exclusive content. It is too easy to go to other sites with the same content now.

Is this where I write the naive reply that they won't close BigStock?

I hope they do and I hope they offer some exclusive photo benefit or exclusive contributor option.

I'm one of the people that would go 100% with SS.

I like IS and their program, especially the CV for buyers to find good results. The 15 uploads a week isn't that big of a problem most of the time, but it is limiting for many people. SS takes editorial and RF and they both sell. Nothing against IS but SS is paying best for what I produce.

For me it would work and I'd be happy to have just ShutterStock and Alamy.

Who knows what they plan to do with BigStock. It was looking like it would become the on demand site, but when they tested removing that option from SS contributors were up in arms. Or at least an loud angry mob with pitchforks and torches!

massman · « **Reply #11 on:** February 03, 2010, 12:21 »

^^ Yup, I earn more with SS ODs than I do at BigStock.

LSD72 · « **Reply #12 on:** February 03, 2010, 12:24 »

I would be right there on Team Shutterstock if the did some type of exclusivity. It's my best money earner. Whatever I shoot or make for the micros... I do with SS in mind first and upload to there first. It would be nice to get a 6 month in advance notice....lol.

sharpshot · « **Reply #13 on:** February 03, 2010, 12:29 »

Quote from: Klauts on February 03, 2010, 11:15

Quote from: sharpshot on February 03, 2010, 11:06
Quote from: borg on February 03, 2010, 10:22
No I can't agree with this...

SS is cca 30 % of my total income, this mean that eventual exclusive program need to bring about 70% more...
That is impossible....

Also subscription site doesn't need unique photos from exclusivity they need new, new and new photos....
Exclusivity isn't benefit for them....

Newer is better...
But they aren't a subscription only site. With StockXpert going, there are only 3 sites selling more pay per download for me now. I think there is a strong possibility that they will close BigStock and move their buyers to SS. I also think that subs buyers are more likely to stay with SS if they have some exclusive content. It is too easy to go to other sites with the same content now.

The problem is, what will they give the contributors to choose exclusivity?
At the moment, their priciest subscription is 250$/month, that translates to 33c/image.
The top tier is earning 38c. If your SS earnings are 50% of total(I think that's a pretty big number), you'll need double the earnings for the same amount of money. That would bring the top tier to 76c per image. that's 43c loss for SS on each image sold. I know most buyers don't use the full quota but on those numbers they'll have to use less than half for SS just barely make a profit.

One way it could work is if they increased prices, but that may not be the best option right now.

I don't see any problem with charging twice as much for an exclusive image. Subs are so much cheaper than pay per download and they haven't kept pace with the price rises. There must be room for higher priced subs, I am making $0.70 and $1.05 for some with DT and they are non-exclusive. If DT can do it with non-exclusive images, SS can with exclusive images.

PeterChigmaroff · « **Reply #14 on:** February 03, 2010, 12:42 »

I agree, i think that exclusivity is the way to go however it can't be the draconian version that exists at iS.

LSD72 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 03, 2010, 13:10 »

Actually, in a selfish look... I would hope they do it on a image basis. This way I would not have to wait 6 months. Everything new I could make exclusive...and I would have time to look and see what images are not on other sites and make them exclusive also.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #16 on:** February 03, 2010, 13:16 »

Quote from: LSD72 on February 03, 2010, 13:10

Actually, in a selfish look... I would hope they do it on a image basis. This way I would not have to wait 6 months. Everything new I could make exclusive...and I would have time to look and see what images are not on other sites and make them exclusive also.

Actually that's the best way to do it. They could have exclusive images, which would attract buyers and keep the usual fare of 10 million images that are on 200 sites, everywhere in the world. It wouldn't take a bunch of sorting through and complicated re-write of the site. Just add the exclusive, leave the rest as they are. The SS exclusive images would be selective and could attract a better price as well as some buyers who want something different.

So not exclusive contributors, but exclusive images, like some other places have been doing.

Best part of that would be I could then keep my IS account and have the two sites that matter and make good sales.

madelaide · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2010, 15:43 »

I feel misplaced when I see people embracing the subscription model so eagerly. $:-\$

LSD72 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2010, 15:58 »

It's a model that seems to work for my images. IS is behind, BS and DT for me. SS is first by a mile. Only makes sense to me to follow who makes me the money.

If IS is the place that makes you the money...and you want to get a crown... do it. Same thing for any of the sites that make the money for the contributor.

Klauts · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2010, 16:08 »

Hmm, yes... Each exclusive image can cost 2 sub downloads instead of one, contributor gets double royalty(or atleast close to double), prices for subscription should remain the same(or raise a little), and buyers won't probably mind because they already have alot of images per day. Only ones that won't benefit directly would be SS, but they can benefit from alot of exclusive content and it may gain more market share from other agencies. Hmm.. What do you guys think? Somebody suggest this to SS?

sharpshot · « **Reply #20 on:** February 04, 2010, 06:12 »

Doesn't look like there are any plans for exclusive images. Have a look at this thread and the blog interview translated from German.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=76255&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.alltageinesfotoproduzenten.de/2010/02/04/treffen-interview-mit-shutterstock-cfo-adam-riggs/&twu=1

LostOne · « **Reply #21 on:** February 04, 2010, 06:23 »

It's hard to speculate (on how you can just easily double the revenue for exclusives) if you don't know their business figures. Maybe this wouldn't be sustainable, just like old IS canisters weren't.

sharpshot · « **Reply #22 on:** February 04, 2010, 06:30 »

Quote from: LostOne on February 04, 2010, 06:23

It's hard to speculate (on how you can just easily double the revenue for exclusives) if you don't know their business figures. Maybe this wouldn't be sustainable, just like old IS canisters weren't.

Do you really think the old IS canisters weren't sustainable? I never believed that, I am sure that was just used as an excuse for istock to decrease commissions and increase their profits before Getty/istock is sold off.

LostOne · « **Reply #23 on:** February 04, 2010, 06:41 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 04, 2010, 06:30

Quote from: LostOne on February 04, 2010, 06:23
It's hard to speculate (on how you can just easily double the revenue for exclusives) if you don't know their business figures. Maybe this wouldn't be sustainable, just like old IS canisters weren't.
Do you really think the old IS canisters weren't sustainable? I never believed that, I am sure that was just used as an excuse for istock to decrease commissions and increase their profits before Getty/istock is sold off.

It probably wasn't sustainable with regards to how much money do they wanna make. Especially with the ever increasing number of images, submitters, submitter canisters, and costs associated with these increases (I don't belive the buyers are increasing as rapidly). But again, this is just a speculation.

LSD72 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 04, 2010, 13:11 »

Quote from: sharpshot on February 04, 2010, 06:12

Doesn't look like there are any plans for exclusive images. Have a look at this thread and the blog interview translated from German.

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=76255&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=de&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.alltageinesfotoproduzenten.de/2010/02/04/treffen-interview-mit-shutterstock-cfo-adam-riggs/&twu=1

Read that. Kinda hard to follow in English. DT is my #2 but far behind SS. I guess if I want to be exclusive... it would have to be there. If thats how it is.. my images and I will remain independent. Too bad because I would go SS Exclusive without any hesitation.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: This is the right moment for SS to intriduce exclusivity! (Read 8819 times)

Dook

sharpshot

Fyletto

Giuseppe Parisi

tamasvargyasi

borg

Giuseppe Parisi

cthoman

sharpshot

Klauts

RacePhoto

massman

LSD72

sharpshot

PeterChigmaroff

LSD72

RacePhoto

madelaide

LSD72

Klauts

sharpshot

LostOne

sharpshot

LostOne

LSD72

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors