Jump to content

Wilm Ihlenfeld

Members
  • Content Count

    1,607
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wilm Ihlenfeld

  1. Hi, Chy, from my personal point of view, there is not much point in comparing with the same month of last year. If you happened to have 3 SODs for $300 last June, that would have been an absolute exception, which makes a comparison with this June impossible or dubious. But I think that you have to calculate simply on the basis of the downloads of this current month - in comparison between the old and the new revenue model. If you can believe the fine words of shutterstock, you should have taken in 5% more with the new model than with the old one. That's not the case with me. And probably not with you either. I don't know your exact figures. I only know your additional income compared to the old model, as far as the ELs and the SODs are concerned. So your profit on the new system is $18.22. But let's say you had 800 subs so far. Then you have 184 US$ and under the old system it would have been 304 US$. A loss of 120 US$. And that is exactly the problem. That's why I assume that with the new model hardly anybody will make a profit.
  2. Apparently, even Level 6 contributors have noticed that the new system already leads to losses. Or they simply accepted the friendly invitation of Jon Oringer and left.
  3. The portfolio of Africa Studio is empty! 1.350.000 images are "missing".
  4. Hi Chy, ELs 39.64 x 100 / 35 = $113,26 That is what the buyer paid for your ELs. You get 35% = 39.64 Old System: $ 113.26 x 0,3 = 33.98 That would have been your income before (Level 4 = 30%) Gain: + 16.6 % SODs 87.89 x 100 / 35 = $251.11 That is what the buyer paid for your SODs. You get 35% = 87.89 Old System: $ 251.11 x 0,3 = 75.33 That would have been your income before (Level 4 = 30%) Gain: + 16.7 % Now you can count together and see if there is a gain or a loss.
  5. Thank you very much, Chy. Received a 2.10 OD
  6. Well, Doug, but obviously that's just a piece of luck in my eyes. Because if you get 30% now and you got 30% under the old system. If you're making more money now than you did before, it's certainly not because of the new system.
  7. Doug, I'd be interested in your old level and you new level. I guess your old level was level 4. Is it like studio 2 / Debbie wrote? Are you also on level 4 (30%) according to the new revenue model?
  8. This is the fifth or sixth time within 14 days that I have been asked to participate in a survey. This time maybe because I was about to delete some pictures again. Just for your information, what shutterstock would like to know from us:
  9. Yeah, Whiteaster, it's only $50 for me, too. But I wanted to get it before I closed the door. I've got two more downloads now, but I'd like to give them to them. They also asked me if I just want to deactivate or delete them completely. The answer that I want to delete completely, but they only get when they have paid. For me bigstock was always unattractive. Nothing ever came across. I've only just made $1,200 there over the years.
  10. I had instructed bigstock to pay off my last earnings. After that I will close my account there. I made the request for payment on 02.06. The answer is that it may take until the middle of the following month (that would be mid-July 2020) until I receive the money. that would be up to 6 weeks. Yes, you are right, that is our money, which they keep there for 6 weeks. That is a long time in the microstock business.
  11. BTW: Since the beginning of this year my shutterstock RPD is exactly 50% of my AS RPD. But it will be even lower in future - that much is sure!
  12. Hi Mr. JK, okay, you had 41 sales. Would you like to tell us how many of those - subs - ODs - SODs were? You had already written that it was 1 Enhanced. And I would like to know your old level, if I may.
  13. If it is possible to get realistic statistics from many contributors, then we have the facts. If it runs optimally, then we have figures for all the different new levels. With such figures you can turn to the media. If it just says: I'm down 74% because I'm getting 10 cents now instead of 38 cents, it doesn't help anyone. Shutterstock would counter that the losses are compensated by higher ODs, On Demands and Enhanced - in higher levels they are even exceeded. We have to expose this rhetorical feint as false testimony. And that can only be done if we have lots of numbers and evidence. The point is to prove that shutterstock's very cleverly devised model is a loss model for all contributors - from level 1 to level 6.
  14. Milo, I like the idea! It creates facts! Is it possible for you to document / save the results? I am not sure if this forum will remain in its current form... I will start with the statistics on June 3rd, because before that the assignments of the SODs and subs were not correct, as shutterstock itself has admitted. For me it's a bit more complex, because under the new system I was level 4 until 09 June and from 10 June on level 5. Under the old system I was on level 4. There is another difficulty: Under the old system there were 2 different ODs: 1.24 (small/medium) and 2.85 I have assigned one of the ODs as small/medium, but I'm not sure if this is true. Numbers: June 03 to June 09 - Level 4 (30%) Subs: 89 Income: ø 0.25 = 22.31 Old system: ø 0.38 = 33.82 ODs: 8 Receipts: ø 2.90 = 23.19 Old system: ø 2.85 = 22.80 ODs (small/medium): 1 = 1.15 Old system: ø 1.24 = 1.24 SODs: 3 = 1.03 Old system minimum: 0.38 = 1.14 ??? With those SODs, I have no idea how to really calculate this. But the old minimum of 0.38 should be correct. Result 03 - 06. June, new level 4: New system total: 47.68 = RPD 0.54 Old system total: 59.00 = RPD 0.66 Loss on new system: 19.2 % _______________________________________ 10 June to 20 June - Level 5 (35%) Subs: 197 Income: ø 0.22 = 44.01 Old system: ø 0.38 = 74.86 ODs: 13 Revenue: ø 3.27 = 43.81 Old system: ø 2.85 = 37.05 Enhanced: 2 Revenues: ø 35.38 = 70.75 Old system: ø 30.32 = 60.64 SODs: 2 = 0.70 Old System Minimum: 0.38 = 0.76 further SODs: 3 - 0.84 - 0.70 - 83.30 These 3 SODs are higher than the former minimum of 0.38. So I assumed that I would get 35% (35%) as opposed to the former 30% (former level 4). This results in the following calculation: further SODs: 3 revenue: 84.84 Old system: 72.72 Result 10 - 20 June, new level 5: New system total: 244.11 = RPD 1.24 Old system total: 246.05 = RPD 1.25 Loss on new system: 1% Note: 2 Enhanced in one month is an absolute exception for me. On average I have 1 Enhanced in 2 months. These 2 Enhanced in June falsify the result very much. Although I should have a proclaimed plus of 5% in the level 5 period, the minus is 1%. And this only because of 2 Enhanced. Otherwise, the minus would be much larger. After 18 days of evaluation it is clear that the new revenue model is already leading to losses - despite two exceptional Enhanced and one large SOD. If you take into account the beginning of the year with the downgrading of the level, the loss will be much higher. Conclusion: It will also result in losses for most Level 5 contributors! I am absolutely sure of that!
  15. Hey, There you are again! Did you get the 38th download this month to complete your reliable statistics?
  16. What shutterstock is doing is illegal from my point of view. If a seller doesn't want to sell an image, then it is. Then shutterstock can't just sell it against your will. Let's say you decided three days ago to sell exclusively to another agency. To be able to offer exclusively there, you have to make sure for legal reasons that your images can't be bought anywhere else, because otherwise you'd be acting illegally - you wouldn't keep your contract as an exclusive provider. So you deactivate your portfolio with all other agencies. Everything done right. Now the agency where you exclusively offer your image will see that it has just been sold on shutterstock. Then they will claim that you have breached your contract. That simply can't happen. A "sales permission" is a crystal-clear statement! Shutterstock selling it anyway is illegal!!!
  17. Yes, Annie, yes, she is indeed a very pleasant personality! Greetings to down under, Wilm
  18. Wow! 2000 times in 3 months is another story of success!
×
×
  • Create New...