Jump to content

Wilm Ihlenfeld

Members
  • Content Count

    1,560
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wilm Ihlenfeld

  1. I think that from his point of view the microstock model no longer makes sense. He knows the real numbers, the ones we never get to see. He knows how shutterstock has evolved recently. He has lost his confidence in the business model he co-founded. Corona may have had a hand in that. In my view, the biggest part is mismanagement, wrong decisions and misalignments. But he may have lost interest in this business long ago. Much more decisive than what Oringer is doing is the question of what those who took over the business from him are doing. And in my opinion, they are swimming around in the area completely disoriented. Destroying not only our livelihood, but their own livelihood as well. I personally believe that the microstock business model will continue to exist for a long time to come, albeit under different circumstances. I personally doubt that shutterstock will survive in this business model in the medium term. But I readily admit that I can be wrong. In a year or two we will know more.
  2. My numbers: RPD 01.06. to 22.08.2019: RPD = 0,81 01.06. to 22.08.2020: RPD = 0,65 RPD 2020 = minus 20% Downloads: 01.06. to 22.08.2019 vs. 01.06. until 22.08.2020 Downloads 2020 = plus 16% Income: June 1 to August 22, 2019 vs. 01.06. until 22.08.2020 Income 2020 = minus 6.2% Without the SODs and Enhanced that I had in June, which were exceptional by my standards, things would look much worse. And this, although I now get 35% - before the maximum was 30%. All this is based on four-digit downloads.
  3. A few exceptions don't change the fact that the RPD has fallen sharply. Since the new revenue structure I have lost 40% in terms of RPD.
  4. Hello, Annie, it's frightening to see Corona causing such severe break-ins for you as well. It's frustrating to see that even a previously enthusiastic, committed and successful contributor like you is no longer uploading anything to shutterstock. If I had a say in the company, I would worry about whether my approach is the right one. Not just because of you, of course. But precisely because people like you have formed the foundation - the foundation for a strong, market-leading company - so far, at least. Of course it is a difficult time for all of us, including shutterstock. But the path shuttersock has taken will not have a good end for all concerned - that much is certain. Shutterstock chose this path because the upper management didn't care what happened at the contributors. But this is a one-way street through which the company must also pass. And the chosen path will take a bitter revenge. Unmotivated "employees" are the death of any company. Here are my figures. We are very close. It's a disaster. Concerning downloads and concerning income!
  5. I'm glad I don't have to share that frustration anymore. Since I'm not uploading anything (stopped at the end of May 2020), I don't have to be angry anymore. I don't want to sound or be arrogant in any way, but when I look at the new images, at least half of them make me wonder how they got past the artificial intelligence selection. Many absolutely unsaleable images. The artificial intelligence sifts through the images. Which is necessary, because the amounts uploaded at shutterstock daily - still, for whatever reason - are too large to be done by staff personnel. So the database grows daily - besides surely also very good material - by masses of bad images. And many good images do not make it through the selection process. Maybe the AI is simply not yet mature.
  6. The question that arises is a purely statistical one. How many downloads do you think are necessary to give a statistically relevant answer? 100? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? If you like, I can calculate the numbers for you. However, I can only give you these figures based on four-digit downloads (I have already posted them here). If that is not enough from your point of view, I am the wrong person to talk to and we have to look for a level 6 provider who is willing to offer reliable statistics. If we find this contributor I am absolutely sure that he will tell you very clearly that things are going downhill. Because it is absolutely certain that shutterstock has calculated to his advantage.
  7. I am still waiting for the announced answer from support on how exactly the downloads of our files for the Microsoft-Ads deal will be compensated. And my feeling tells me that I will never get an answer to that.
  8. $ 0.38 before $ 0.23 in average now since June 01 61% of what it used to be. Based on 1079 subs till yesterday. So it will remain like this (+/- 1 Cent) for the rest of the year. If the downgrade at the beginning of the year is taken into account, it would be under 20 cents. I don't know yet if I can check that, because at the moment I assume that I will deactivate my portfolio as of December 31.
  9. Hello, Sheila, I'm sorry to remind you: As of January, all of us are newcomers. Whatever you have achieved for yourself and therefore also for shutterstock is worth nothing after January 1st. Then you are nothing. A nobody. A bloody beginner. A newbie. Who seems to know nothing about this buisness. That's the thanks for your achievements and for the fact that you have contributed to shutterstock becoming a leading microstock agency. It remains to be seen how long this definition of shutterstock as a leading microstock agency will last.
  10. That reminds me of R. Kelly! ... If anybody asks you who I am, just stand up tall, look 'em in the face and say I'm that star up in the sky I'm that mountain peak up high Hey I made it, hmm I'm the worlds greatest ... And the world will notice a king (oh, yeah) When all is darkness, I'll shine a light (shine a light) And the mirrors of sucesss reflect in me (Me) I'm that star up in the sky I'm that mountain peak up high Hey I made it I'm the worlds greatest
  11. My Top 20 here at shutterstock: 6.632 2.393 1.763 1.353 1.146 948 911 869 844 790 763 748 711 707 666 625 565 558 544 541
  12. Yesterday I had my personal negative record. 50% of the downloads were those for $0.10 - despite level 5.
  13. Hello, Mirko, i just tried this and can't find your image - screenshot attached.
  14. Thank you for this information, Steve! It reassures me to know that they would like more uploads. So it hurts them after all that many contributors do not act in the way they want to.
  15. Thank you very much for your kind words, Jose! I will definitely try again there at a later date.
  16. Hmmm, that's interesting, Christina. It would also be interesting to know how many other providers have also received this message. I haven't received anything like this. However, I'm one of the low uploaders, so shutterstock probably doesn't think I'm interesting. Anyways: every line you write is absolutely correct.
  17. Attached the facts as an image. A few more remarks: My numbers are generally bad at the moment - not only at shutterstock. Maybe it's the virus. Even according to the old earnings structure July and August would be extremely bad. I haven't uploaded anything to shutterstock since the end of May. Maybe this is also noticeable. However, I have uploaded new images to other agencies, and still the income is bad there, too. I have deleted some images from shutterstock. July 2020 was my worst July since 2011. July at AS was not good either but I had 27% more income there. August is on it's way to my worst month ever at shutterstock. Maybe at AS as well. Only 13% more than here. Desaster!
  18. Hi Alexandre, once again, thank you very much for taking the time to bring this subject to my attention! Yes, the problem with the missing persons is certainly also a problem. On the other hand, when I look at book series, such as Charlotte Link, Dan Brown, Frank Schätzing, Henning Mankell, Gil Ribeiro and many more, they are usually free of people. But, sure, it would certainly be beneficial to add to the theme. And, yes, that's also true, my images are not unique enough and mostly too static or a bit boring.
  19. Thank you very much, Alexandre. That's interesting, because I wouldn't have thought of three of your examples. The image of the ship I had sent there. I had made a subjective selection of images that I thought might come into question - a few examples are given below.
  20. I would like to thank Alexandre Rotenberg for the information about Arcangel. And thank you, Deb, for bringing this up once more. I did not know this agency before. Since I found 10 books with covers that were made with my images, I decided to apply there. Unfortunately I was rejected. The reasons were detailed and extensive. And I admit that most of my images are certainly unsuitable for book covers. I am aware that the typical microstock style is not suitable there. In addition, I would have had a problem with the minimum width of 4,500 px anyway - but I didn't have the info until after I had sent the application.
×
×
  • Create New...