pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: We are having some impact  (Read 21803 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #100 on: June 29, 2020, 13:14 »
0
Actually, I consider myself a novice in everything and in all aspects of life. I love being a rookie. I am an expert in being a novice.

Your posture is interesting, the phone is synonymous with a novice. In addition, the mobile is synonymous with profitability in the SS agency. A mutual benefit in a new business strategy that benefits the Agency and the Novice Collaborators.

Then, they are called professionals in this sector, in the intermediate section between Las Fabricas and El Movl.

Interesting conclusions.


« Reply #101 on: June 29, 2020, 17:26 »
+1
....
Probably for most of us this new payment rate means that... stop producing and doing something else or uploading to other agencies.

most already upl to multiple agencies

finding 'something else' is the problem - we'd already be doing it if we knew (i discovered collectible comics & maps many yrs ago for amazon & ebay - margins are great, but volume is low)


besides, most 'other' things would be too much like a job!

« Reply #102 on: June 30, 2020, 04:38 »
+7
So I suppose Adobe, pond5, Alamy, Dreamstime will become agencies for good quality content.

SS will still have the content from the stock factories, butgood quality localized and niche content will be forced to go elsewhere.

Well, I sure hope you are right, but I'm afraid people will continue uploading to SS, also their high quality content.
Keywording is done for other agencies anyhow, and ticking an additional checkbox in whatever uploading system they are using is dead easy.
In addition, aggregators like Wirestock make it even more easy to upload to different agencies, with contributors profiting from the higher earning tiers.

Sure, some people will stay away from SS because they don't agree with the earning- and commission structure, but the majority won't and just take the money.
I don't agree with DT and P5 becoming agencies with good content. They basically take everything, there's plenty of junk in their databases too.
Additionally, everybody dumping their catalogue on other platforms right now makes it even more difficult to sell something there, as there is an increase in content, but not an increase in buyers.

And the problem with localized and niche content is that ... well it doesn't sell that frequently.
Some assets may experience a short burst in sales due to an event, but most of it will never be looked at or only sell very occasionally.

SS will continue to grow and receive content. Maybe not as much as they used to have, but enough to cover the commercial relevant topics and satisfy their buyers.

As you said, it's a self regulating system, and as it looks right now, SS is not really suffering or on the verge of running dry due to the boycott from a minority of the contributors.

« Reply #103 on: June 30, 2020, 14:19 »
+5
Lets see how many will still be able to produce quality
and cover the costs

« Reply #104 on: June 30, 2020, 14:46 »
+6
Lets see what happens on Jan. 1.

« Reply #105 on: July 01, 2020, 00:40 »
+1
Lets see what happens on Jan. 1.

We'll all be hungover...

« Reply #106 on: July 01, 2020, 15:28 »
+5
It looks like SS is badly loosing sales to AS based on this forum's poll results:

Annotation-2020-07-01-222425" border="0

I don't know if it's going to be a one-off effect due to a lot of people who boycotted SS in June and who, respectively, reported none to little sales, or whether it's a general trend that will continue further on, with AS soon overtaking SS as the Top 1 selling agency:

Annotation-2020-07-01-222425-2" border="0

SpaceStockFootage

  • Space, Sci-Fi and Astronomy Related Stock Footage

« Reply #107 on: July 02, 2020, 02:02 »
+9
More likely the poll figures are just as a result of the boycott... I mean, if 50% of the people here have disabled their portfolios, then all things being equal (including the number of sales SS are getting), sales will appear to have dropped by 50% on the poll.

« Reply #108 on: July 02, 2020, 05:07 »
+1
If it is true that there are more than a million contributors on Shutterstock, only a few thousand of them have disabled their portfolios, most have stopped uploading, and a small portion continue to upload, then disabling the portfolio or suspending the upload is all about self-respect and common sense. Who values and respects themselves, disables the portfolio or at least stops uploading. Those who do not value themselves and their work continue to upload new content. But do you really think that Shutterstock will listen to the several thousand contributors who have disabled their portfolios? Reporting period for Shutterstock... My portfolio was turned off, did it affect anything? While someone keeps uploading hundreds of images... When someone with a criminal past died of a drug overdose, the whole world went out to protest. No one will come out to protest for us, because there is no organizer and Director. No one is interested in our problems, because they cannot cause a global response. I think that Shutterstock decided to make more money on us. And it never reverses it's decisions. I'm preparing myself for the fact that I need to get out of there completely.

« Reply #109 on: July 02, 2020, 05:14 »
+6
If it is true that there are more than a million contributors on Shutterstock, only a few thousand of them have disabled their portfolios,
There are no millions of contributors on SS. There's less than a 100k of actively working portfolios. Others are abandoned, or never started. Active uploaders was counted in 2016 and it was only 30000. After that making a profit for newbies became harder, so I highly doubt they could double the number.
« Last Edit: July 02, 2020, 05:21 by PokemonMaster »

« Reply #110 on: July 02, 2020, 05:46 »
0
If it is true that there are more than a million contributors on Shutterstock, only a few thousand of them have disabled their portfolios,
There are no millions of contributors on SS. There's less than a 100k of actively working portfolios. Others are abandoned, or never started. Active uploaders was counted in 2016 and it was only 30000. After that making a profit for newbies became harder, so I highly doubt they could double the number.
PokemonMaster, thank you for your answer.

« Reply #111 on: July 03, 2020, 00:12 »
+1
Looking at the graphs of the last 5 days I wonder what impact we're actually having...
(SSTK and Shutterstock portfolio size)

« Reply #112 on: July 03, 2020, 15:40 »
0
fwiw, the market has been up this week

https://www.google.com/search?q=s%26p+500+chart

Les

« Reply #113 on: July 13, 2020, 13:24 »
+6
It's not surprising that SS wants to show a record number of images to their shareholders. That's about the only metric they can show.

The contributors need not worry whether it is 321 or 324 millions.
Out of that volume, 40% are similars, 20% are technically inferior images, and 25% are low-quality, low sale potential images.
Subtract these numbers and it leaves something like 100 million decent images.

csm

« Reply #114 on: July 13, 2020, 13:48 »
0
It's not surprising that SS wants to show a record number of images to their shareholders. That's about the only metric they can show.

The contributors need not worry whether it is 321 or 324 millions.
Out of that volume, 40% are similars, 20% are technically inferior images, and 25% are low-quality, low sale potential images.
Subtract these numbers and it leaves something like 100 million decent images.

I reckon an agency could do well on just a few million images, if every one was the cream.

No other agency apart from Alamy shows how many images they have, and I do wonder who's benefit that is for.
Do we really want to know?
What difference does it make to us?
It just makes us appreciate how bloated agencies are with images that will never sell.

csm

« Reply #115 on: July 13, 2020, 13:51 »
0
It's not surprising that SS wants to show a record number of images to their shareholders. That's about the only metric they can show.

The contributors need not worry whether it is 321 or 324 millions.
Out of that volume, 40% are similars, 20% are technically inferior images, and 25% are low-quality, low sale potential images.
Subtract these numbers and it leaves something like 100 million decent images.

I once heard that generally about 5% of an agencies portfolio sold well. That's not specificly Ss. Just an average.
Not sure if that still stands generally. But if it does, whats 5% of 320M? 16M

Les

« Reply #116 on: July 13, 2020, 13:57 »
+3
It's not surprising that SS wants to show a record number of images to their shareholders. That's about the only metric they can show.

The contributors need not worry whether it is 321 or 324 millions.
Out of that volume, 40% are similars, 20% are technically inferior images, and 25% are low-quality, low sale potential images.
Subtract these numbers and it leaves something like 100 million decent images.

I once heard that generally about 5% of an agencies portfolio sold well. That's not specificly Ss. Just an average.
Not sure if that still stands generally. But if it does, whats 5% of 320M? 16M

Very likely, half of those 16M images were removed or disabled last month. Or soon they will be.


« Reply #117 on: July 13, 2020, 14:02 »
+1
If it is true that there are more than a million contributors on Shutterstock, only a few thousand of them have disabled their portfolios,
There are no millions of contributors on SS. There's less than a 100k of actively working portfolios. Others are abandoned, or never started. Active uploaders was counted in 2016 and it was only 30000. After that making a profit for newbies became harder, so I highly doubt they could double the number.

And of those only around 17,000 had portfolios in excess of 1,000 images.

Les

« Reply #118 on: July 14, 2020, 11:10 »
+6
And now SS is begging for new images. The below email received today:

Working on anything exciting? We'd love to see your latest content! Upload your recent work so that our customers around the globe can see it and you can start earning from it.

« Reply #119 on: July 14, 2020, 13:58 »
0
If it is true that there are more than a million contributors on Shutterstock, only a few thousand of them have disabled their portfolios,
There are no millions of contributors on SS. There's less than a 100k of actively working portfolios. Others are abandoned, or never started. Active uploaders was counted in 2016 and it was only 30000. After that making a profit for newbies became harder, so I highly doubt they could double the number.

And of those only around 17,000 had portfolios in excess of 1,000 images.
I actually found the numbers. In the end of 2016 it was 14,000 with portfolios over 1000. In the end of 2018 it was 18,000. Easy to guess, now it's around 20,000. And we have a 11,000 votes under the petition on Change.org to revert the earnings system.

« Reply #120 on: July 14, 2020, 15:57 »
0

I actually found the numbers. In the end of 2016 it was 14,000 with portfolios over 1000. In the end of 2018 it was 18,000. Easy to guess, now it's around 20,000. And we have a 11,000 votes under the petition on Change.org to revert the earnings system.

but how many of those voters have > 1000 images? (begging the question of whether a yes vote is the same as a disabled port)

« Reply #121 on: July 14, 2020, 16:13 »
+5
This week the weekly amount of images uploaded have a dramatic reduction from almost 900k to 578,128

Les

« Reply #122 on: July 14, 2020, 19:48 »
+7
I don't understand how anybody can still rationalize image and video uploading to SS.

Let's say you made a reasonably good image and hope to sell it 100 times over the life of the image. Very optimistically, you can assume an average price of 15c per download. Under these assumptions, you'll make in total measly $15 from that one image. Of course, there will be other images which will sell only once or never. 

« Reply #123 on: July 15, 2020, 02:51 »
+7
From here on its all downhill and if one accepts this deal then next year you be working for 0.2c per sale and so on! they had it all in the palm of their hand and blew it sky high!
Even if they get over this which they will their name is tarnished forever and buyers will eventually react! in the creative circle a bad name is the very worst that can happen a service and sooner or later they will bite the dust.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2020, 02:54 by Horizon »

« Reply #124 on: July 15, 2020, 03:31 »
0
From here on its all downhill and if one accepts this deal then next year you be working for 0.2c per sale and so on! they had it all in the palm of their hand and blew it sky high!
Even if they get over this which they will their name is tarnished forever and buyers will eventually react! in the creative circle a bad name is the very worst that can happen a service and sooner or later they will bite the dust.

wishful thinking -misquoting Keynes 'sooner or later we all bite the dust'

buyers don't care and probably don't even know -  as 'everyone' keeps saying SS is making more $$


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
78 Replies
17790 Views
Last post December 21, 2007, 19:42
by madelaide
5 Replies
3201 Views
Last post March 23, 2008, 15:42
by madelaide
6 Replies
3434 Views
Last post May 03, 2008, 07:06
by a.k.a.-tom
9 Replies
4497 Views
Last post August 18, 2013, 21:34
by RetroColoring.com
39 Replies
2729 Views
Last post August 14, 2020, 14:14
by farbled

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle