Author Topic: Storyblocks actually listens to contributor complaints! How can that happen? (Read 25743 times)

KB · « **on:** August 09, 2018, 10:16 »

In case you haven't read your email yet:

In the weeks since announcing our new commission structure, we’ve had the opportunity to speak with a number of contributors in the community. You have given us valuable feedback about how we can serve you better, and we have been working hard to put your ideas into action.

In particular, many of you have expressed concern with our member price for HD footage remaining at $49 with a 50% commission structure in place. We understand how important pricing is—not only to your earnings with Storyblocks—but to your overall participation in the stock media market. We have decided to address your concerns and will be raising the price of HD footage.

By October 15, 2018, we will raise the publicized price of HD footage to $79. This is the price that guests will pay to purchase an HD clip. Members will also be charged $79 per clip, but they will receive a 10% instant rebate at the end of their checkout, the cost of which we will share 50/50 between us and you. In other words, when we sell an HD clip to a Storyblocks member, you will earn $35.55 per asset. For sales to guests, you will earn $39.50 per asset. This also means Storyblocks will no longer collect a “guest fee” from nonmember purchases. These changes will be reflected in your contributor agreement as well. The new 50% commission share will begin as planned on August 15.

We will never stop working to create a sustainable, thriving community for you, our contributors. Our relationship with you is what sets Storyblocks apart, and we do not take that for granted. As always, please reach out to [email protected] with any questions you have.

All the best,
The Storyblocks Team

Of course I'm still not thrilled with the commission cut. But the price increase helps alleviate that somewhat, and brings their prices more in-line with other stock sites. It's nice to see a company actually make a positive change in response to contributor feedback.

KB · « **Reply #1 on:** August 09, 2018, 10:18 »

Oh, no, dueling threads!

http://www.microstockgroup.com/videoblocks/success!-storyblocks-listens-to-contributors-on-pricing/

Any chance of a merger?

KevinM · « **Reply #2 on:** August 09, 2018, 10:30 »

Mods deleted other thread as a duplicate. It's OK, my point there was that we achieved success through speaking up! CAN'T EMPHASIZE ENOUGH HOW FANTASTIC IT IS THAT CONTRIBUTORS MADE THEMSELVES HEARD THROUGH WRITING EMAILS, DELETING PORTFOLIOS, REFUSING TO UPLOAD, ETC.! This is how we protect our interests as contributors and keep our industry viable. Great job, everyone!!

Video-StockOrg · « **Reply #3 on:** August 09, 2018, 10:34 »

Nice. Good news.

aetb · « **Reply #4 on:** August 09, 2018, 10:36 »

So we earn 50% of 79$ istead of 100% of 49$
With the fees and everything.. that mean 35.55$ instead of 42.44$
...
and you guys find it's a good idea ?
Probably I don't get it at some point.

KB · « **Reply #5 on:** August 09, 2018, 10:55 »

Quote from: aetb on August 09, 2018, 10:36

So we earn 50% of 79$ istead of 100% of 49$
With the fees and everything.. that mean 35.55$ instead of 42.44$
...
and you guys find it's a good idea ?
Probably I don't get it at some point.

Let me help explain it to you.

1. We make more per sale than under their first plan, and that change is wholly due to contributor feedback.
2. They make money this way on every sale, compared to making $0 under their original scheme. Despite their previous stated belief, they were not able to continue under that model. This makes it "sustainable".
3. Their prices for HD clips are now similar to industry prices, which means we aren't undercutting ourselves by having our clips on SB.

I hope that helps.

trek · « **Reply #6 on:** August 09, 2018, 11:00 »

Big improvement. Will resume uploading.

aetb · « **Reply #7 on:** August 09, 2018, 11:03 »

1. We make more per sale than under their first plan, and that change is wholly due to contributor feedback.
... sure... just not that first point.
Like I said it's about 7$ drop per sale.

KevinM · « **Reply #8 on:** August 09, 2018, 11:05 »

The original Storyblocks 100% commission rate was great while it lasted but ultimately unsustainable. Cutting commission by 50% but not raising prices was unfair to contributors and damaging to the market. By keeping commissions at 50% but raising prices to market standards, a balance has been struck and commission dollars are good.

RAW · « **Reply #9 on:** August 09, 2018, 11:11 »

Well it's better than the alternative.

aetb · « **Reply #10 on:** August 09, 2018, 11:18 »

Quote from: KevinM on August 09, 2018, 11:05

The original Storyblocks 100% commission rate was great while it lasted but ultimately unsustainable. Cutting commission by 50% but not raising prices was unfair to contributors and damaging to the market. By keeping commissions at 50% but raising prices to market standards, a balance has been struck and commission dollars are good.

So they got that huge amount of footage and contributors to become just like others right after.
That was for sure par of the plan since the start... anyways - 50% of 49$ is not cool... I get it now.
I just did not see that they were going to do that move.

... I don't want to make people angry... but I still feel that Storyblock has sucessfully stop giving 100% comission and contributors are happpy with that.
If they would decided in one day to raise the prices and then take 50% everyone would be pissed - but because they "negociated" you seems all proud of what you got. Foor me Storyblock just became like other companies.

KevinM · « **Reply #11 on:** August 09, 2018, 11:41 »

Quote from: aetb on August 09, 2018, 11:18

Quote from: KevinM on August 09, 2018, 11:05
The original Storyblocks 100% commission rate was great while it lasted but ultimately unsustainable. Cutting commission by 50% but not raising prices was unfair to contributors and damaging to the market. By keeping commissions at 50% but raising prices to market standards, a balance has been struck and commission dollars are good.

So they got that huge amount of footage and contributors to become just like others right after.
That was for sure par of the plan since the start... anyways - 50% of 49$ is not cool... I get it now.
I just did not see that they were going to do that move.

... I don't want to make people angry... but I still feel that Storyblock has sucessfully stop giving 100% comission and contributors are happpy with that.
If they would decided in one day to raise the prices and then take 50% everyone would be pissed - but because they "negociated" you seems all proud of what you got. Foor me Storyblock just became like other companies.

So you think 100% commission forever is sustainable and they're wrong for stopping it? I have to disagree with that perspective, and I don't think they lied when they said 100% commission was unsustainable. If they had originally came to us as contributors and said they have to make a change to stay in business, I would be fine with it as long as the change was fair and not damaging long-term to the market (i.e. low sales prices AND lowering commissions). Their idea on how to change was bad, they got stung for it, and now they've adjusted to end up in a fair place. They should have done that from the start. Think about it - they're now selling at the same price as SS but with a higher commission rate. Frankly, let's hope that lasts, we'll see if they can pull it off.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #12 on:** August 09, 2018, 12:34 »

Quote from: aetb on August 09, 2018, 11:03

1. We make more per sale than under their first plan, and that change is wholly due to contributor feedback.
... sure... just not that first point.
Like I said it's about 7$ drop per sale.

The point is that it's $10 more than it was going to be. Nobody is celebrating that were getting less than we were... we're just slightly happier that were getting more than we were about to start getting.

ForrestBrown · « **Reply #13 on:** August 09, 2018, 12:50 »

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 09, 2018, 12:34

Quote from: aetb on August 09, 2018, 11:03

1. We make more per sale than under their first plan, and that change is wholly due to contributor feedback.
... sure... just not that first point.
Like I said it's about 7$ drop per sale.

The point is that it's $10 more than it was going to be. Nobody is celebrating that were getting less than we were... we're just slightly happier that were getting more than we were about to start getting.

Also, by raising the price of footage to $79, Storyblocks is no longer massively undercutting the prices of the other stock sites, which is something that a lot of contributors has disliked about StoryBlocks.

RAW · « **Reply #14 on:** August 09, 2018, 13:06 »

Isn't this illegal 'Price Fixing' ?

DavidK · « **Reply #15 on:** August 09, 2018, 13:24 »

Kudos to KevinM and everyone else who was/were so strident and active in their opposition to this. For those who did nothing, enjoy your free lunch. You know who you are. Perhaps next time something like this happens (which it will) maybe more of us will be motivated to participate .

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #16 on:** August 09, 2018, 14:28 »

Quote from: RAW on August 09, 2018, 13:06

Isn't this illegal 'Price Fixing' ?

No, it's price fixing in the sense that they've changed the price. Companies do that all the time without it being illegal.

RAW · « **Reply #17 on:** August 09, 2018, 15:21 »

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 09, 2018, 14:28

Quote from: RAW on August 09, 2018, 13:06
Isn't this illegal 'Price Fixing' ?

No, it's price fixing in the sense that they've changed the price. Companies do that all the time without it being illegal.

Matching all the other $79 HD companies sure sounds like price fixing to me.

"Price fixing is an agreement (written, verbal, or inferred from conduct) among competitors that raises, lowers, or stabilizes prices or competitive terms. Generally, the antitrust laws require that each company establish prices and other terms on its own, without agreeing with a competitor."

Visualab · « **Reply #18 on:** August 09, 2018, 15:42 »

Raw??what's the point??do u want sb to set their price to be different from other agenicies so you are happy??78.50 for hd is nice??77.50 is better??

Inviato dal mio SM-G930F utilizzando Tapatalk

flywing · « **Reply #19 on:** August 09, 2018, 16:12 »

Quote from: RAW on August 09, 2018, 15:21

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 09, 2018, 14:28
Quote from: RAW on August 09, 2018, 13:06
Isn't this illegal 'Price Fixing' ?

No, it's price fixing in the sense that they've changed the price. Companies do that all the time without it being illegal.

Matching all the other $79 HD companies sure sounds like price fixing to me.

"Price fixing is an agreement (written, verbal, or inferred from conduct) among competitors that raises, lowers, or stabilizes prices or competitive terms. Generally, the antitrust laws require that each company establish prices and other terms on its own, without agreeing with a competitor."

It seems "resale price maintenance" is allowed in some cases, though.

StockStudio · « **Reply #20 on:** August 09, 2018, 16:51 »

Does that mean Dissolve will need to update it's HD prices back to $79 for all those who sell both on VB and dissolve??

ForrestBrown · « **Reply #21 on:** August 09, 2018, 17:03 »

Quote from: StockStudio on August 09, 2018, 16:51

Does that mean Dissolve will need to update it's HD prices back to $79 for all those who sell both on VB and dissolve??

I was wondering that also, I would guess that they would need to. Maybe time to put my footage on Dissolve.

pkphotos · « **Reply #22 on:** August 09, 2018, 20:26 »

Quote from: StockStudio on August 09, 2018, 16:51

Does that mean Dissolve will need to update it's HD prices back to $79 for all those who sell both on VB and dissolve??

They will have to, no other option open to them

Mantis · « **Reply #23 on:** August 09, 2018, 20:50 »

Quote from: ForrestBrown on August 09, 2018, 17:03

Quote from: StockStudio on August 09, 2018, 16:51
Does that mean Dissolve will need to update it's HD prices back to $79 for all those who sell both on VB and dissolve??

I was wondering that also, I would guess that they would need to. Maybe time to put my footage on Dissolve.

I would not give Dissolve sh!t even if they went to $79. Their spots haven't changed who they are.

aetb · « **Reply #24 on:** August 10, 2018, 00:35 »

Hey guys... I'm not saying they are lying about the fact that it's unsustainable at 100% comission.
What I mean is more than that... it's that their plan was maybe already taught.

Let me explain it properly and if you don't understand it's because I'm not clear.
You can believe me or not - I'm not always right in life.

So... imagine you want to start a new stock company. - and that you have the budget to make low profit for more than a year. Would it be a good idea to give 100% commission to contributors and then make sure to have all the footage quick and from all around the world. Contributors would also refer their clients since they get 100% commission ! Would that be nice !? What IF that was the plan and it was also the plan that AFTER beeing the fastest growing stock video company - they start making money like others !!. Imagine if their plan was to sell videos at 79$ and get 50% commission from day one. It's politics then... you remove something to the mobs, your sad... you said you make sacrifices - then they are not happy, so you give a little more then they are happy.

What I think it that since day one, they wanted to get 50% commission of 79$ video stock clips. They did some politics... some kind of emotional negotiation with you. If you would not said anything, they would probably keep their clips at 49$... maybe not even since NOW they have the clients... NOW they have all the contributors ! So why having low prices... ? They can do like big players now !

I just hope I'm wrong - but let assume... if you start a new stock video company today - you could do exactly the same thing and it would work - or at least, you would get some contributors uploading at start.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #25 on:** August 10, 2018, 01:03 »

So what's the solution/best course of action for contributors?

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #26 on:** August 10, 2018, 05:18 »

Quote from: RAW on August 09, 2018, 15:21

Matching all the other $79 HD companies sure sounds like price fixing to me.

"Price fixing is an agreement (written, verbal, or inferred from conduct) among competitors that raises, lowers, or stabilizes prices or competitive terms. Generally, the antitrust laws require that each company establish prices and other terms on its own, without agreeing with a competitor."

Price matching and price fixing are two very, very different things. You should look it up.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #27 on:** August 11, 2018, 06:56 »

Did they regain my trust completely? No. After all, they deliberately cut our commissions, broke their initial promise and tried to pass it off as a good thing. That means they are either incompetent (i.e. their business plan wasn't sound to begin with) or greedy, or both. The damage is already done and I'll never look the same at them again.

Think about it, they must have discussed different scenarios before implementing the commission cut. Did the backlash really surprise them? I find that hard to believe. Maybe this was part of their cunning masterplan; cut commissions, wait for a backlash and then proceed with new pricing to make us feel heard.

And apparently it works. Contributors are slowly accepting the new situation: SB profits, we lose money but still continue to upload. Well played SB, well played.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #28 on:** August 11, 2018, 09:02 »

It's what mainly politicians do with respect to taxes. "Next month taxes are going up 10%! What? Too High? Sorry, we can't"... <several weeks pass> "After careful consideration, we've realized we can save you 5% on taxes, so it will only go up 5%"... <applause from audience>

Quote from: Noedelhap on August 11, 2018, 06:56

Did they regain my trust completely? No. After all, they deliberately cut our commissions, broke their initial promise and tried to pass it off as a good thing. That means they are either incompetent (i.e. their business plan wasn't sound to begin with) or greedy, or both. The damage is already done and I'll never look the same at them again.

Think about it, they must have discussed different scenarios before implementing the commission cut. Did the backlash really surprise them? I find that hard to believe. Maybe this was part of their cunning masterplan; cut commissions, wait for a backlash and then proceed with new pricing to make us feel heard.

And apparently it works. Contributors are slowly accepting the new situation: SB profits, we lose money but still continue to upload. Well played SB, well played.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #29 on:** August 11, 2018, 09:14 »

Have politicians ever done that?

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #30 on:** August 11, 2018, 09:22 »

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 11, 2018, 09:14

Have politicians ever done that?

Cite a higher raise in taxes, then only raise them slightly? Yes, many many times.

(In my example - there was still a 5% raise in taxes. However, how it was "worded" is people think they are "saving" 5%, but the wording is "5% off the original 10%", so it is still a 5% raise. Not a 10% raise.

lol - I guess it works though. Re-read what I wrote - and you'll see there still was a '5%' raise...

KevinM · « **Reply #31 on:** August 11, 2018, 10:49 »

This line of "thought" is absurd conspiracy theory. If they were deviously planning both a commission cut and price raise, it would have obviously been much smarter to have done them at the same time to soften the blow of the commission cut. By doing one and then waiting 1-2 weeks, they lost portfolios, lost uploads, killed trust with their contributors, etc. Plainly NOT the best course of action from a business standpoint. What this appears to be on the surface is exactly what it was: they thought people would accept a 50% commission, since that is still tied for highest commission among major sites. But they sorely miscalculated vis a vis their low prices. When it was shown to them just how bad their thinking was by a whole lot of pissed off contributors who took the time to respond, they realized they needed to adjust, so they did.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #32 on:** August 11, 2018, 12:12 »

Quote from: SuperPhoto on August 11, 2018, 09:22

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 11, 2018, 09:14
Have politicians ever done that?

Cite a higher raise in taxes, then only raise them slightly? Yes, many many times.

(In my example - there was still a 5% raise in taxes. However, how it was "worded" is people think they are "saving" 5%, but the wording is "5% off the original 10%", so it is still a 5% raise. Not a 10% raise.

lol - I guess it works though. Re-read what I wrote - and you'll see there still was a '5%' raise...

Yeah I understand what you said, I'm just wanting to know where was this country where they said they were raising it to 10% and then they only raised it to 5%, and when was this?

DallasP · « **Reply #33 on:** August 11, 2018, 16:56 »

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 09, 2018, 14:28

Quote from: RAW on August 09, 2018, 13:06
Isn't this illegal 'Price Fixing' ?

No, it's price fixing in the sense that they've changed the price. Companies do that all the time without it being illegal.

If it were a monopoly then it could be. That PharmaBro guy comes to mind. In a free market you are, as should be, free to set whatever price on your products/services that you care to.

Edit: Energy companies in Texas! That's a good one, they're always getting wrapped up in lawsuits.

aetb · « **Reply #34 on:** August 11, 2018, 19:36 »

Quote from: Noedelhap on August 11, 2018, 06:56

Did they regain my trust completely? No. After all, they deliberately cut our commissions, broke their initial promise and tried to pass it off as a good thing. That means they are either incompetent (i.e. their business plan wasn't sound to begin with) or greedy, or both. The damage is already done and I'll never look the same at them again.

Think about it, they must have discussed different scenarios before implementing the commission cut. Did the backlash really surprise them? I find that hard to believe. Maybe this was part of their cunning masterplan; cut commissions, wait for a backlash and then proceed with new pricing to make us feel heard.

And apparently it works. Contributors are slowly accepting the new situation: SB profits, we lose money but still continue to upload. Well played SB, well played.

Yup !
That's why I took the time to explain my opinion in details.
I had to stop uploading since the last 6 months and I got that e-mail... then got here and saw that post of happy people !
...
I was kinda shocked and went to read the whole story and yes - that looks like a master plan well organized to me.
Whatever what's the result. I have to said that asking 25% at first would have been more acceptable than 50% in one shot.
Anyways... we all loose money and they will start making millions.

Noedelhap · « **Reply #35 on:** August 12, 2018, 05:55 »

Quote from: KevinM on August 11, 2018, 10:49

This line of "thought" is absurd conspiracy theory. If they were deviously planning both a commission cut and price raise, it would have obviously been much smarter to have done them at the same time to soften the blow of the commission cut. By doing one and then waiting 1-2 weeks, they lost portfolios, lost uploads, killed trust with their contributors, etc. Plainly NOT the best course of action from a business standpoint. What this appears to be on the surface is exactly what it was: they thought people would accept a 50% commission, since that is still tied for highest commission among major sites. But they sorely miscalculated vis a vis their low prices. When it was shown to them just how bad their thinking was by a whole lot of pissed off contributors who took the time to respond, they realized they needed to adjust, so they did.

Absurd conspiracy? Maybe. But I cannot imagine they never considered a possible backlash. The thought of angry contributors threatening to cease uploading or removing their portfolio should have crossed their mind. Business decisions aren't made over night, it's a process of careful consideration, meetings, discussions, weighing the pros and cons. If they really underestimated our reaction and suddenly decided to cushion the blow after the fact, then management is simply incompetent. I don't know what's worse: deceiving your contributors, or mismanaging your business.

helloitsme · « **Reply #36 on:** August 12, 2018, 09:01 »

Too late. I deleted all my files there.

helloitsme · « **Reply #37 on:** August 12, 2018, 09:03 »

Quote from: StockStudio on August 09, 2018, 16:51

Does that mean Dissolve will need to update it's HD prices back to $79 for all those who sell both on VB and dissolve??

Forget about Dissolve. People are nasty there. Bad people to do business with. I'll never go back.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #38 on:** August 14, 2018, 13:00 »

Various local cities with respect to property taxes, and percentages vary. Every 2-3 years, the city will say "to grow/support infrastructure, we need to increase property taxes by _x_ amount". Usually a large percentage. Then a public outcry. Then the city says 'oh, okay, it will only go up by _x_ amount".

Also, something that is popular in Canada is to say that people are getting a "huge" tax break with a home renovation project/whatever the flavor of the year is, usually between $500-$1000. (The real value of that though is actually only about $75-$150 off the 'final' tax bill, because it is pre-tax). But then the CPP contributions (a type of tax), or something else (varies, again) increase by "only" 1% of the total income. People that can't do math, or don't take the time to do it think its a great deal. But 1% of a $30k income (which is a base/minimum wage salary) is $300 in taxes. So the net effect is that taxes have gone up. Of course, if you make more than that, you pay more.

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 11, 2018, 12:12

Quote from: SuperPhoto on August 11, 2018, 09:22
Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 11, 2018, 09:14
Have politicians ever done that?

Cite a higher raise in taxes, then only raise them slightly? Yes, many many times.

(In my example - there was still a 5% raise in taxes. However, how it was "worded" is people think they are "saving" 5%, but the wording is "5% off the original 10%", so it is still a 5% raise. Not a 10% raise.

lol - I guess it works though. Re-read what I wrote - and you'll see there still was a '5%' raise...

Yeah I understand what you said, I'm just wanting to know where was this country where they said they were raising it to 10% and then they only raised it to 5%, and when was this?

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #39 on:** August 14, 2018, 13:03 »

Unfortunately, at this point in time, doesn't make much of a difference. Because if one person decides to stop uploading, there are 10 more in his place ready to jump at the opportunity to make 'riches' submitting content.

I don't think they really care, other than their bottom line.

Quote from: Noedelhap on August 12, 2018, 05:55

Quote from: KevinM on August 11, 2018, 10:49
This line of "thought" is absurd conspiracy theory. If they were deviously planning both a commission cut and price raise, it would have obviously been much smarter to have done them at the same time to soften the blow of the commission cut. By doing one and then waiting 1-2 weeks, they lost portfolios, lost uploads, killed trust with their contributors, etc. Plainly NOT the best course of action from a business standpoint. What this appears to be on the surface is exactly what it was: they thought people would accept a 50% commission, since that is still tied for highest commission among major sites. But they sorely miscalculated vis a vis their low prices. When it was shown to them just how bad their thinking was by a whole lot of pissed off contributors who took the time to respond, they realized they needed to adjust, so they did.

Absurd conspiracy? Maybe. But I cannot imagine they never considered a possible backlash. The thought of angry contributors threatening to cease uploading or removing their portfolio should have crossed their mind. Business decisions aren't made over night, it's a process of careful consideration, meetings, discussions, weighing the pros and cons. If they really underestimated our reaction and suddenly decided to cushion the blow after the fact, then management is simply incompetent. I don't know what's worse: deceiving your contributors, or mismanaging your business.

SuperPhoto · « **Reply #40 on:** August 14, 2018, 13:13 »

Quote from: SpaceStockFootage on August 11, 2018, 12:12

Yeah I understand what you said, I'm just wanting to know where was this country where they said they were raising it to 10% and then they only raised it to 5%, and when was this?

Also - recently (in Ontario), the minimum wage was increased from about $11 to $14 (about a 27% increase). However, the cost of regular goods & services (so companies could pay the higher salaries) went up about 40%. On top of that, now since most people are in higher income/tax brackets - they actually pay even more tax than they did before.

So numbers wise - they "make" more gross income. But practicially speaking, they are poorer/worse off than before the wage hike, because their dollar doesn't buy as much, AND, they now pay more taxes overall.

SpaceStockFootage · « **Reply #41 on:** August 14, 2018, 14:18 »

So they put it down to $12.50?

rod-09 · « **Reply #42 on:** August 18, 2018, 04:18 »

Where is the 79$ sale?

obj owl · « **Reply #43 on:** August 18, 2018, 04:24 »

Quote from: rod-09 on August 18, 2018, 04:18

Where is the 79$ sale?

From the original post "By October 15, 2018, we will raise the publicized price of HD footage to $79."

Video-StockOrg · « **Reply #44 on:** August 18, 2018, 04:31 »

Oh, I misread, I thought that from 15. of August this will go live.

obj owl · « **Reply #45 on:** August 18, 2018, 06:10 »

Jumping to conclusions, good research and considered opinion are all things of the past now, it's called the Trump effect. Misread, misheard, mis fecking spoke, you will never be wrong again.

rod-09 · « **Reply #46 on:** August 18, 2018, 06:58 »

my bad... I thought it was on the 15 august the whole changes.

2 months gap between the 2 different changes... Really smart move from them

Mograph · « **Reply #47 on:** October 19, 2018, 16:38 »

I got sale yesterday and the price still at $49.00!!!

pkphotos · « **Reply #48 on:** October 19, 2018, 22:25 »

Quote from: Mograph on October 19, 2018, 16:38

I got sale yesterday and the price still at $49.00!!!

No big deal, it was probably made a day or two before the change in price.

travelstock · « **Reply #49 on:** October 20, 2018, 03:32 »

Quote from: Mograph on October 19, 2018, 16:38

I got sale yesterday and the price still at $49.00!!!

I'm not sure what's more surprising - getting the sale or it being at the old price.

Rather than an increase in sales which Storyblocks suggested would happen though these changes, mine have dropped a further 50% from when we were getting 100%, so down to about 10% of their peak. The agency is now firmly in the "why bother" category. Seriously considering deleting my portfolio there.

increasingdifficulty · « **Reply #50 on:** October 20, 2018, 04:07 »

Quote from: Mograph on October 19, 2018, 16:38

I got sale yesterday and the price still at $49.00!!!

Just like over at Pond5, there is likely a delay of a few days between a sale and a sales report, so that we don't freak out about all the fraudulent purchases that are made.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Storyblocks actually listens to contributor complaints! How can that happen? (Read 25743 times)

RAW

RAW

RAW

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors