Jump to content

New earnings structure for Contributors

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 7.3k
  • 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

Well, that was expected.
At the beginning of 2010s Istock (the first stock! Goliath among stocks at the time!) did some crazy stuff too. Contributors got mad => Shutterstock blossomed. And now Istock is just Getty's appendage. Sadly, today Shutterstock is the new Istock. And people in the thread are right - in 3-4 years Adobe Stock probably will be doing the same. But for these years – hail the Adobe. The Circle of life, I guess.
I'm not going to deactivate my portfolio (yet), but I'm stopping to upload new content here. We worked for years to get from 25 to 38c per download. And now, as we can see, we won’t be able to get even those 25c (even at the highest level!).

I mean, it was expected but this decision IS insulting for anyone with a little bit of dignity.

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

Я был расстроен вчера. Мне было грустно. Но сегодня я обнаружил, что вы удаляете комментарии в Instagram и теперь я просто в ярости! Платите авторам 10 центов за их работу, воображение, время, зрение, амортизацию оборудования и электричество. Делайте это во время пандемии. Ты отвратителен

comments will not be deleted on appstore and playmarket

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear sirs,

our current level of cooperation is that we provide our content to you and you sell our content, earning a hefty commission that covers for storage, distribution network and advertising, along with an added profit. It's all reasonable and we have gladly accepted this model of cooperation over the years and it would be more polite and market diverse by your side, if you actually discussed your intentions with contributors before stating that they will take place in just a few weeks. In a market that some of your competitors are rising fast, did you really think that it was the best move to one-sided decide something that does not come in agreement with all contributors?

I actually believe that the current model rewards active contributors and "punishes" old inactive ones in decline, or, new non-experienced contributors. I belong to the first group so I don't think that I will see my income affected harshly, unless it does. I will create new statistics to check my earning global average / dl. Right now it's $0,65. But Adobe Stock is at $0,89 and iStock is $0,45. So if you drop from $0,65 it will be bad news, but if you raise it will be good news. We just need to wait and see.

The most wrong in this new deal is of course, throwing everyone to LvL 1 every first of the year, even if it is for 100 dl's. You have over a million contributors and closing in 300.000.000 images did you surpass it yet? For those 50-60 million downloads you are asking for a (15%-20%) of a commission boost. On what basis should that be happening? The correct model should be the same as the industry standard right now with similar structure: to earn in a tier that bases on the last rolling 12 months. You are not motivating contributors to push for retention right now but rather to just think that they are getting an unfair cut from their percentages every year for the first two months.

Kind regards,
Thomas Andreas

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just ridiculuos!!! And if its a joke, then it so stupid one....

New CEO or shutterstock in general must be very stupid if they think that contributors 10 years with SS and now we'll be getting this commission???

I work hard (i think we all work hard in general) and thats the reason they were popular. And i also worked hard to get where i am today.What i noticed - new portfolios, new uploads became low quality, so what will do SS when old portfolios will be suspected?:))) (and i believe that it will be) means only low quality remain...Good luck then competeting with other stocks which seems trying to keep high quality. 

I remember when Shutterstock excepted only good quality and commercial valued images, i rememebr when Shutterstock was number one.

The change is just stupid, because you say you want to promote new content on the platform, but instead this you are removing any incentives to upload new content because of this minimum payment. Enjoy trying to do money with new funny portfolios because seems that you will be in problems with selling old and valuable ones:)) (as many going to suspect, this makes no absolute sense for no one, just stop contribute).

At the moment I will stop to upload new content. And i think about to delete my portfolio also. SS want changes?:))) ALL CONTRIBUTORS PROBABLY SAY YES - AND WE WILL MOVE TO OTHER PLATFORMS:))) 

The faster SS will "die" the faster others have chance to grow (or to start).

And in our company we used to say - bad smell first coming from the CEO. It's true:))) 


Link to post
Share on other sites

This could have made some sense, and even understandable, if the level had been based on last year's sales. Photographers who upload actively and keep their portfolio current  would win. But getting back to zero, or 15%, every January is just a way of saying that what we do has little value, particularly what we do the last months of the year.

This also means that it's important to shoot photos that sell well at the begining of the year, since that will influence the commission rate all year, while the Christmas photos will have no consequence for next year's rating. As many others have said, SS used to be a great agency. It's been losing its shine a bit lately, and this reduces its priority for me drastically compared to a few other leading agencies which I will now have to give higher priority.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Steven Tritton said:

Seriously if the contributor community want to make an impact there needs to be organizing as many contributors together to effectively disrupt the new model. I see suggestions to opt-out of sales from 1 June. No need to delete ports unless contributors want to. Just turn them off. There needs to be a clear and concise message and instruction to fellow contributors on various forums on how to opt-out on 1 June, perhaps for a period of two weeks (initially) to send a clear message. A 10% to 20% shutdown of content would suffice to achieve this as shareholders won't be happy with a significant drop in sales and profits.

Key is the contributor community need to strike while the iron is hot because this is the only chance you have to make a difference before emotions settle and a new normal sets in. There won't be another chance.

Just my humble opinion.


Agreed, and done!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andreas Prott said:

So let’s have a different look at the situation:

Assumption: Shutterstock lost money on the large subscriptions for years.

What does that mean for their business acumen? Either they were just dumb for several years or the calculation is just different: customers don’t use up all subscription slots.

Hey wait a minute: if the customers didn’t use up all images, why will they set us on 15 to 40% of max usage leaving a guaranteed margin of 60 to 85% for shutter plus cashing in 100% on unused download slots? Because they are not dumb - and are now ripping off the contributors with their own guaranteed margin plus bonus for their insanely cheap subscription packages. So in consequence they would even get a higher share on higher plans - the risk of business is now completely on the backs of the contributors. Well done!


So shutterstock (and others) destroyed the market with subscription plans and are now transferring the risk of business (over utilization) to the suppliers and even reek in a Bonus on unused slots. A win win for shutter on over and under utilization.

I want an opt out of ridiculous subscription plans (over 350 images).

Link to post
Share on other sites

All the people that say they will leave - will not leave. Maybe 5% will actually leave. SS divisions know this, and rely on this. iStock still exists and works full on, doesn't it?

It is a disgrace what SS I doing to people that actually are SS.

There is so many contributors now that SS became a state. A very bad one. They say it is because of new market needs, but it really is because of corporate capitalist greed, and people's will to work hard for bread crumbs.

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...