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

@Philip Rozenski - The question is, which model scenario is it. What are the most common packages bought? I asked that question of Kate something like 20 pages of this thread ago, but no answer was given. Personally, I will take a wait and see approach to this until July 1. If my earnings crash to the floor during June, then I'll know this new thing is not working out for me, and can make further decisions then.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Eric Urquhart said:

Umm, I think you might want to look at the chart again. The only subs that will make any money are the 5-10 images a month. I suspect those are a small percentage of the users. Most sub plans are the 350-750 and the highest you can get from those is 23 cents! Work hard all year to finally get to 23 cents in December only to have it go back to a dime in Jan. How depressing is that!!!

SO, yeah, if you happen to get all the business from the lower tear more expensive plans, there is a chance to make more per image, but remember, they max out at ten images. So they are not buying much.

 Actually the have 1.9 million active users--say 90% on subscription or 1.71MM-- but 80% are image and 20% are video so 1.368 photo focuses subscribers.

46 million downloads Q1--about 184 million a year-- we will say 80% are images so say 147.2MM images per year or 12MM per month and we will contribute them all to subscription for shits and grins.

That is less than 9 subscription photos taken per account... someone in the art department is getting fired as they wasted $100 a month every month on subs. 

I can run a solve for on the formulas in the model for you tomorrow but it is late.  But basically most will sell in the 50 per month subs or you would be getting a shit ton of direct downloads.  You have to understand the 10 and 50 downloads are cheap alternatives to direct download costs.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Milo J said:

@Philip Rozenski - The question is, which model scenario is it. What are the most common packages bought? I asked that question of Kate something like 20 pages of this thread ago, but no answer was given. Personally, I will take a wait and see approach to this until July 1. If my earnings crash to the floor during June, then I'll know this new thing is not working out for me, and can make further decisions then.

See above with data from annual report... I am seeing data that points to a large number in the 50.

What is amazing is all of this is going on and no one is reading the annual reports, running models etc...  it was just run for the door.  

Again to me it feels they are trying to reduce cost of review by pushing out the low volume revenue accounts that put a high burden on review costs.  I think if you make tier iv in the first 3 months you could be looking at higher revenue not less.

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

See above with data from annual report... I am seeing data that points to a large number in the 50

That would be reassuring, but if that is so, why would Kate not say so? Could have doused the flames.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PlopandShoot said:

Good luck to you then. I've been here more than 15 years, and doing micro for longer than that. I can read the signs and I know this industry well enough within my own niches to make informed decisions. You simply don't throw good money after bad, and this is bad for me.

Every contributor is different, has different needs, wants, talents, and time available to do this. Not everyone, even top sellers, can simply throw away their earnings for a week or a month or three to gain enough to climb back up to a level that is still lower than what they earn today. 

Sure, specific editorial shooters who cater to the most successful areas *may* climb back up and make money after 3 months as you say. If that is the direction the company wants to go in, more power to them.

Its good that producers like me will leave with my over 10k images that sell all day every day. Win win. Right?

 :)

 

And good luck to you as well.  I get it if you don't feel comfortable it isn't right to stay anywhere.

But hasn't all trend historic trends gone to other platforms?

 

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

That would be reassuring, but if that is so, why would Kate not say so? Could have doused the flames.

That is a good question.  Regardless of if I am right or wrong and if they are doing good or bad this was a PR flop.  Failure to communicate no mater what.

That said these firm hold their market tiering data sacred so they don't want to signal is my guess.  

Bad communications in business is more common than we think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We do all of the work, operate at a loss for our time and expense to hand them a finished product, make an insulting percentage and fight the reviewers constantly to do so. What exactly does SS do to earn their cut exactly? Abuse their content creators and ruin their own business with the worst decisions possible? No self respecting artist of any value would accept these conditions for their work. No producer in any market would accept these conditions in exchange for their goods. I guess SS believes theres enough Unsplash artists out there willing to upgrade from giving it away for free to getting pennies instead.
I'm done with stock and am moving on to other ventures not in constant decline.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Milo J said:

@Philip Rozenski - The question is, which model scenario is it. What are the most common packages bought? I asked that question of Kate something like 20 pages of this thread ago, but no answer was given. Personally, I will take a wait and see approach to this until July 1. If my earnings crash to the floor during June, then I'll know this new thing is not working out for me, and can make further decisions then.

A rational approach sir!

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Philip Rozenski said:

 Actually the have 1.9 million active users--say 90% on subscription or 1.71MM-- but 80% are image and 20% are video so 1.368 photo focuses subscribers.

46 million downloads Q1--about 184 million a year-- we will say 80% are images so say 147.2MM images per year or 12MM per month and we will contribute them all to subscription for shits and grins.

That is less than 9 subscription photos taken per account... someone in the art department is getting fired as they wasted $100 a month every month on subs. 

I can run a solve for on the formulas in the model for you tomorrow but it is late.  But basically most will sell in the 50 per month subs or you would be getting a shit ton of direct downloads.  You have to understand the 10 and 50 downloads are cheap alternatives to direct download costs.

 

According to the shutterstock subscription plans page 350 is the most popular. I didn’t need to run a solve, simulation or algorithm. I just looked at their own website. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, if your an early adopter (i.e. long time contributor) you deserve to be continually 'rewarded' for your content?

Versus a contributor who is out in the field uploading the most relevant (i.e. 'fresh' or current) content available?

Oh. I get it. Protect the status quo, first users first! - ummmm, no.

I applaud Shutterstock for seeking value over legacy. Relevance over bloodline.

I like the change. I have content that is useful, and appreciate Shutterstock is wiling to reward RELEVANCE

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been contributing to Shutterstock for over 10 years now, whenever i feel like uploading and doing metadata Shutterstock was my first choice because i knew the time and effort i put into it will worth over a period of time but after the recent earnings tier update i think it is not going to worth it anymore.

Thanks Shutterstock for the lovely decade. I might not delete my portfolio but i certainly will be a lot less motivated to upload new stock while knowing the effort wont worth it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Eric Urquhart said:

According to the shutterstock subscription plans page 350 is the most popular. I didn’t need to run a solve, simulation or algorithm. I just looked at their own website. 

Nope but puffery is allowed in marketing.  Could be one more than the 50.  Could mean they only sell on 750 a year.  You will sill need some algebra there.  If you think about it if 50% of their subs in this model were the 350 and user only drew down 200 per month you would have 650K subscribers downloading 130 million images a month...but they only sell 12 million.

Direct from their financial report...

Over 1.9 million active, paying customers contributed to our revenue for the twelve-month period ended March 31, 2020. As of March 31, 2020, more than 1.2 million approved contributors made their images, footage and music tracks available in our collection, which has grown to more than 330 million images and more than 18 million footage clips. This makes our collection of content one of the largest of its kind, and we delivered more than 46 million paid downloads to our customers across all of our brands during the three months ended March 31, 2020.

And I am not saying anyone has to stay or go... but just injecting debate and analyzing hard reported SEC numbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

All contributors reset to level 1 for both images and videos every year on January 1st.

Just tell us honestly, what is the fair in this January reset?

If the author worked hard all year, and in December he has excellent performance, then this 'wipe' will look like an undeserved fine for him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a total joke. Every January back to the lowest earnings ?!? Shutterstock used to be number one in my book, but not any more. Why don't they just cut the BS and not pay us at all as everything they are doing lately (it is painful to upload vectors now) makes me feel that they don't actually want contributors.

Extremely bad move from what was once a really good, fair and honest company.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Huhu.. bad news in a Covid crisis world where I depend on my sales. I've been trying hard to make myself go up, higher in rank for years and then this sad sad news... 1) Resetting every January is like an arrow to the heart. :( 2. It has affected my emotions and creativity plus the long year plans to stay creative and submit mostly to Shutterstock only. So sad.. Can't explain my mixed feelings... Need to find another ways to survive financially (without my skills and creativity getting taken advantaged). So  I need to change my priorities... stop uploading here first until this scheme and nightmare will be over. :(

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi! 

I've been with Shutterstock since 2014, I have 19672 images on sale right now, and this is not loads of crap, they are images that sell well here and elsewhere (I've been assigned Level 5).

Until yesterday, I loved being a microstock photographer, I have no other income. As I see it, what Shutterstock is doing now is probably going down in flames, but taking the whole industry with them. I understand that the current payouts model is probably unrealistic under the circumstances, but the drastic cut and the manner in which it has been announced are too much. Definitely this measure opens up way to similar changes on other microstocks, which will lead to professionals just not being able to gain any serious income from them.

This is why I will deactivate my portfolio on the last day of May, if nothing changes (and I have no hope left that it will).

I am so sorry that our beloved Shutterstock has gone and done something like this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever" George Orwell

Shutterstock must just be honest they ain't got no loyalty. They are just lining their own pockets at the cost of the contributors. I think at this time we should invest more into Adobe, yes we understand you a business but when you have no regard for the people that brought you where you are it's time for them to pull out.

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...