Jump to content

New earnings structure for Contributors


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 7.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In an email that is going out today, we are announcing that we will be updating the earnings structure that determines how much you get paid when customers license your work. We are making this adjust

This is just a joke. 10 years with SS and now I'll be getting 20% commission on my footage clips??? No lifetime sales tier, just what you sold last year/this year.... To get to the curr

This space will be updated to address frequently asked questions.  My email shows different counts for videos than are shown above. Which is correct? Apologies. The email to video contributo

Posted Images

1 minute ago, Milo J said:

It is possible that things might just even out.

That was the pitch we got when SS changed the sub license from 250,000 views to 500,000 views, and allowed buyers to carry unused monthly contracts over from month to month.  The response was, "You'll make it up in Els and ODDs".  It never happened.

ELs have pretty much died, for me, anyway.  

Everything SS has done to this point has screwed us.  It's just that now, they don't care about hiding it any more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is very worrying...

"help to create fair opportunities for all our contributors, and reward performance with greater earnings potential" ... very nice choice of words, greater earning POTENTIAL... sure there is greater earning potential in some cases but overall it might be more likely that yearly revenue will drop for most contributors.

Currently, all contributors are guaranteed at least $0.25 per image. With your new fee structure we could earn as low as 0.049 cent per image for the first 100 images (level 1 at 15%), this is bad!... and if we add the discounted price you offer for yearly upfront subscription package, then the minimum price per image drops to 0.03 cent per image... getting paid 0.03 cent per image is absolutely ridiculous!!!

Sure that is for level 1 earning, but even at level 6 (which very very few will achieve) then, the minimum commission is only 0.08 cent per image... such low commissions shouldn't ever be possible! This is a problem.

Right now, customers pay anywhere between 0.33$ per image all the way up to 4.90$ per image for subscription plans while on demand plans vary between 9.16$ to 14.50$ per image.

I understand this doesn't tell the whole picture, it seems that for ON DEMAND image, overall this new earning scheme should result in higher earnings for contributors but  ON DEMAND only represent a fraction of earnings... About 80% of downloads are from subscription plans (based on my all time sale data in earning summary dashboard), however, the problem is we dont know what subscription plan most buyer use... The cost per image vary greatly among the different subscription plans, from 0.22 per image for a 750 image monthly image package paid yearly upfront all the way up to 4.90$ per image for 10 image per month package (paid monthly). This is a huge variance and makes it hard for us to estimate how this change will affect our earnings. Could you tell us the percentage composition of each package, or just which package is overwhelmingly most popular ?

I can only hope you will hear your community and at least make a few adjustment to the new commission structure... a few suggestions:

  1. No matter what level, keep the minimum 0.25 cent per image...
  2. Increase your subscription plan prices.
  3. Add more intermediary steps between level, instead of 6 levels, have 12 levels.
  4. Alternatively, if you dont add intermediary steps, you should raise the earning percentage for each level AND/OR make it easier to reach level 5+ (right now the jump from level 4 to level 5 is too big, and even worst for level 5 to level 6, very few people will ever be able to reach level 6 and if they do, it will most likely be after several months and then everything resets back to level 1... very disappointing.
  5. Remove the level reset, OR change it so that instead of resetting to level 1, you simply keep track of the last 12 months of image download... this I think would be a lot more fair and if you implement any of my suggestiong, I hope it will be this one... so at any given time, the system tracks how many downloads in the last 12 months and you go up or down the levels based on that, no need to reset everything at the end of the year :(
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Phil Lowe said:

That was the pitch we got when SS changed the sub license from 250,000 views to 500,000 views, and allowed buyers to carry unused monthly contracts over from month to month.  The response was, "You'll make it up in Els and ODDs".  It never happened.

ELs have pretty much died, for me, anyway.  

Everything SS has done to this point has screwed us.  It's just that now, they don't care about hiding it any more.

totally agree but now Shutterstock says i can't like any other posts, so have to send you this.  Well said

Link to post
Share on other sites

So... Are there any hot topics on the board today? :)

I guess, Kate from Shutterstock is having a more intense day then usual )))

 

But c'mon guys, we all seen it coming, and honestly, it could be worse, didn't it? Remember videoblocks (lol)), I just bite my tongue every time when I remember the amount of time I spent to upload  like 10k of videos to them, right before their cute move.

Personally, I have minimised my uploads to SS the moment they went to the new subscription scheme.

I mean, c'mon, does it really makes a big different for you if you are getting 25% or 30% from 5$ per video? (I mention videos, since this is my main port) 

Because I have the same amount of downloads as always, but my revenue already went down by 60-70%, so the new announcement doesn't really change much.

I would love to live with this new scheme, if the 5-10$/video packs were removed eventually. This is much better, then what it already been for the past month.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, OrnamentJungle said:

Guys,

There will always be someone willing to work for few cents and Shutterstock knows this.

Is the McDonalds effect. If you give up on your work, someone else will take your place willing to work for less so it's a matter of you having principles or not.

No one is going to start new account for selling at 0,10$ because no one can survive with that

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kate, 

Do you really believe that we can upgrade our equipment with $0.1?

One lens is $1000-2000. Camera $2000-3000. One light $1000-2000. 

As you know, istock made a similar change in its pay model few years ago and they lost thousands of contributors and market value. It is sad to see that Shutterstock is insisting to make the same mistake in 2020. I must be at level 6 now but i see that i am at level 4 in your email. Your email is not clear. Please give us detailed information instead of giving %.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only real way to put people's minds at ease (or at very least give them some reasonable expectation of what is about to happen to their income) @Kate Shutterstock  - is to provide some transparent information/data about the number of downloads per subscription plan. If the vast majority of downloads are coming from 350 or 750 image subscription packages, then everyone (including tier 6 contributors) will make substantially less than even the lowest flat rate of .25. I don't expect you to divulge full complete customer subscription stats per package.... but just giving us a rough breakdown of averages per subscription plan would be instrumental in figuring out what kind of hit this will cause. 

This data must already exist, and we'll all find out soon enough when earnings start to be directly effected. So why not just give everyone a heads up starting right now?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, OrnamentJungle said:

Guys,

There will always be someone willing to work for few cents and Shutterstock knows this.

Is the McDonalds effect. If you give up on your work, someone else will take your place willing to work for less so it's a matter of you having principles or not.

I can't image many good contributors hanging around with such massive price drops.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rasika108 said:

So... Are there any hot topics on the board today? :)

I guess, Kate from Shutterstock is having a more intense day then usual )))

 

But c'mon guys, we all seen it coming, and honestly, it could be worse, didn't it? Remember videoblocks (lol)), I just bite my tongue every time when I remember the amount of time I spent to upload  like 10k of videos to them, right before their cute move.

Personally, I have minimised my uploads to SS the moment they went to the new subscription scheme.

I mean, c'mon, does it really makes a big different for you if you are getting 25% or 30% from 5$ per video? (I mention videos, since this is my main port) 

Because I have the same amount of downloads as always, but my revenue already went down by 60-70%, so the new announcement doesn't really change much.

I would love to live with this new scheme, if the 5-10$/video packs were removed eventually. This is much better, then what it already been for the past month.

 

It´s like a White House press briefing when Mr Trump insult everyone!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Richard Whitcombe said:

People said that with IS.  Didnt happen.  SS know it wont happen.

There are more than enough prepared to submit for peanuts.

I remember when IS drastically lowered their commissions for contributors, there were unusually long review times at SS. And this wasn't just a coincidence. SS stated that there were a lot of contributors who were abandoning another stock agency and joining SS and this was placing a greater work load on reviewers. Of course they didn't mention which stock agency that was but it was pretty obvious that it was a mass exodus from IS. Though I guess there were also many people who remained at IS to keep it afloat. Many left but many stayed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, john sklba said:

I can't image many good contributors hanging around with such massive price drops.

Or even some of the not-so-good. I admit I'm a hobbyist myself, but I'm not thrilled by this (and my portfolio is low-selling and tiny compared to most of you here so basically meaningless to them).

Link to post
Share on other sites

My all time sales and my may sales ...byby shutterstock, good I never made an exclusive deal and have my portfolio also with pond5, adobe stocks, naturefootage, framepool. What I am loosing here, I guess I will win it on the other side. Who is loosing? Shutterstock I guess, because you made a very, very short sighted decision ... what is hot today isout tomorrow .... I am selling underwater footage and there  is always a demand.  Greed is killing the planet and ..... fill in the blanks ;O) By By we had a good time together ...yearned more than 100 000 U$ in all the years .... you got your share and I got mine. Now you loose me and my portfolio ..... and a lot of money .... 

shutterstock.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...