Jump to content

New earnings structure for Contributors


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, byswat said:

In December for 1 photo I get $ 0.36
After resetting the rating.
In January for the same 1 photo I get $ 0.10
Do I understand correctly that you officially admit to the theft of my money on the pretext that this should motivate me to help you steal even more of my deductions?

Look!

I think you (and all of us)  will be getting 10 cents from 1 June 

https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/topic/100133-new-earnings-structure-for-contributors/?do=findComment&comment=1841427

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.5k
  • 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 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

Just when you think Shutterstock couldn't completely and utterly screw the contributors and more you've gone and done it. Effectively with a January reset everybody gets a cut of 20% or more of e

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, Philip Rozenski said:

Here is a further post from last night below...you are making the assumption that the vast majority of their sales are the highest tier 750 a month.  Their financials show that is far from the truth.  Most are likely the 50/month subscription ...here is the repost with  data from their SEC filed financial reports

  • They have 1.9 million active users--lets say 90% on subscription or 1.71MM-- but 80% are for photo/illustration images and 20% are video so 1.368 photo focuses subscribers.
  • They reported just 46 million total downloads Q1 2020--about 184 million a year-- we will say 80% are images so say 147.2MM images per year or 12.25MM per month and we will contribute them all to subscription for shits and grins.
  • That is less than 9 subscription photos taken per account in the best circumstances.  someone in the art department is getting fired as they wasted $100 a month every month on subs so the vast majority CAN NOT BE 750/month accounts or we would be seeing a massive number of DDs

Everyone keeps making the universal assumption that most photos are and will be sold to 750 image per months subs that would get you the 10 cents.

So we will walk through some math....

  •  Lets say  80% of sales are images or 1.5MM active users and 12.6MM images per month is an average of 8.28 images per account
  • But lets say 30% are direct download users so 1.064MM sub users.  That means subs average 8.3 DLs per account
  • Now lets run three scenarios to see if we can try to allocate sub accounts to the tiers to see what it would take to get numbers approximately right.image.thumb.png.898cb4a7d9a1ba9d88e4205ab06359d4.png
  • Most likely something like scenario 3 is how sub accounts would be allocated. With only 3% or so of sales in the 750 a month or 10 cent per image range..

Now are these number perfect... certainly not.  What they tell us is it would be very unlikely for 750/month subs to be the lions share of the download sources.  Either they would rely on a massive customer under utilization of subscriptions or they rely on a significantly higher volume of 10 unit and 50 unit per month subs and a moderate amount of subscription under utilization (hence why the don't roll over credits).  I would say there is a likelihood that 10 per month or $2.90 per image is about 50% of their subs. 

Remember my premise of why would they do this?  Incentivize more interaction with their plat form and penalize low quality/value contributors with the annual reset.

I would also think they would be resetting subs soon as they refresh the business model. 

 

 

8 minutes ago, Philip Rozenski said:

Here is a further post from last night below...you are making the assumption that the vast majority of their sales are the highest tier 750 a month.  Their financials show that is far from the truth.  Most are likely the 50/month subscription ...here is the repost with  data from their SEC filed financial reports

  • They have 1.9 million active users--lets say 90% on subscription or 1.71MM-- but 80% are for photo/illustration images and 20% are video so 1.368 photo focuses subscribers.
  • They reported just 46 million total downloads Q1 2020--about 184 million a year-- we will say 80% are images so say 147.2MM images per year or 12.25MM per month and we will contribute them all to subscription for shits and grins.
  • That is less than 9 subscription photos taken per account in the best circumstances.  someone in the art department is getting fired as they wasted $100 a month every month on subs so the vast majority CAN NOT BE 750/month accounts or we would be seeing a massive number of DDs

Everyone keeps making the universal assumption that most photos are and will be sold to 750 image per months subs that would get you the 10 cents.

So we will walk through some math....

  •  Lets say  80% of sales are images or 1.5MM active users and 12.6MM images per month is an average of 8.28 images per account
  • But lets say 30% are direct download users so 1.064MM sub users.  That means subs average 8.3 DLs per account
  • Now lets run three scenarios to see if we can try to allocate sub accounts to the tiers to see what it would take to get numbers approximately right.image.thumb.png.898cb4a7d9a1ba9d88e4205ab06359d4.png
  • Most likely something like scenario 3 is how sub accounts would be allocated. With only 3% or so of sales in the 750 a month or 10 cent per image range..

Now are these number perfect... certainly not.  What they tell us is it would be very unlikely for 750/month subs to be the lions share of the download sources.  Either they would rely on a massive customer under utilization of subscriptions or they rely on a significantly higher volume of 10 unit and 50 unit per month subs and a moderate amount of subscription under utilization (hence why the don't roll over credits).  I would say there is a likelihood that 10 per month or $2.90 per image is about 50% of their subs. 

Remember my premise of why would they do this?  Incentivize more interaction with their plat form and penalize low quality/value contributors with the annual reset.

I would also think they would be resetting subs soon as they refresh the business model. 

 

600 people only in the world buy top subs plan? are you dreaming.....i know 3 people who have subs plan and all three have the biggest one. 5

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

What sucks for me is that Adobe doesn't take Editorial content, and that's what I sell the most right now. Anyways, I won't give a single picture for 0.10, when iStock went that route I deleted my account, that's what I'll do here if this scheme prevails.

love adobe and it not sell bad, but people in my opinion are overrating the level of sale of adobe compared to ss....apart the fact they are losing sales during last period like if not worst than ss....but adobe at least for me , and i think many others, account mostly to 10 20% of ss. and considering ss can discount plan due to less royalty...make the maths, adobe will be in trouble soon and it will dampen a new scheme too to stay competitive....or we decide from tomorrow all together to dump ss istock 123rf and all the other agency in favour of pond and adobe or we won't survive.

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

Here is a further post from last night below...you are making the assumption that the vast majority of their sales are the highest tier 750 a month.  Their financials show that is far from the truth.  Most are likely the 50/month subscription ...here is the repost with  data from their SEC filed financial reports

  • They have 1.9 million active users--lets say 90% on subscription or 1.71MM-- but 80% are for photo/illustration images and 20% are video so 1.368 photo focuses subscribers.
  • They reported just 46 million total downloads Q1 2020--about 184 million a year-- we will say 80% are images so say 147.2MM images per year or 12.25MM per month and we will contribute them all to subscription for shits and grins.
  • That is less than 9 subscription photos taken per account in the best circumstances.  someone in the art department is getting fired as they wasted $100 a month every month on subs so the vast majority CAN NOT BE 750/month accounts or we would be seeing a massive number of DDs

Everyone keeps making the universal assumption that most photos are and will be sold to 750 image per months subs that would get you the 10 cents.

So we will walk through some math....

  •  Lets say  80% of sales are images or 1.5MM active users and 12.6MM images per month is an average of 8.28 images per account
  • But lets say 30% are direct download users so 1.064MM sub users.  That means subs average 8.3 DLs per account
  • Now lets run three scenarios to see if we can try to allocate sub accounts to the tiers to see what it would take to get numbers approximately right.image.thumb.png.898cb4a7d9a1ba9d88e4205ab06359d4.png
  • Most likely something like scenario 3 is how sub accounts would be allocated. With only 3% or so of sales in the 750 a month or 10 cent per image range..

Now are these number perfect... certainly not.  What they tell us is it would be very unlikely for 750/month subs to be the lions share of the download sources.  Either they would rely on a massive customer under utilization of subscriptions or they rely on a significantly higher volume of 10 unit and 50 unit per month subs and a moderate amount of subscription under utilization (hence why the don't roll over credits).  I would say there is a likelihood that 10 per month or $2.90 per image is about 50% of their subs. 

Remember my premise of why would they do this?  Incentivize more interaction with their plat form and penalize low quality/value contributors with the annual reset.

I would also think they would be resetting subs soon as they refresh the business model. 

 

Don't you think these scenarios are waaaay too optimistic? If your scenario 3 is real, according to my math, I would earn THE DOUBLE of my current earnings with the new structure. I find it really hard to believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is worst thing happen for contributors since I work with shutterstock from 2014. We are all know how many new clients and downloads shutterstock has because of us but they are don't give a thing about us. There are too many people who live just to work with shutterstock and have much less money than McDonalds workers in Europe or US and now we will be payed even less? This is just not serious. I don't wanna believe that this is just happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Samo Trebizan said:

The only rigt thing would be if shutterstock would have nothing to offer to their clients on June 1st

nobody will leave apart some....if people digested istock crappy royalty why not 10 cent year...then 5 cent  then 1.....microstock is going to end as industry soon...tons people use freee images, there are millions of people thinking of living out of photography, 350 millions content....i mean it's not sustainable. impossible. even big company in russia producing millions of file will not be able to survive. next year there will be another cut and another...it's simply an industry who cannot have a future due to zero entry barrier, low cost of production and exploding offer with a demand year after year collapsing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Patricio_Murphy said:

What sucks for me is that Adobe doesn't take Editorial content, and that's what I sell the most right now. Anyways, I won't give a single picture for 0.10, when iStock went that route I deleted my account, that's what I'll do here if this scheme prevails.

Adobe take Editorial content

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ruslan_Grebeshkov said:

Сосиски с химией. Я ответил на ваш вопрос? Удачи.

Ясно. В таком случае вы испортите свое здоровье и вам конкуренцию в жизни составят более здоровые люди. В случае с рекламой в инстаграмме, выиграют ваши конкуренты которые используют хорошую картинку. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway i have  little hope that I'm wrong and most subs are bought as part of 50 10 image plan , in that case we lever 4 5 will earn much more with subs sale....so i wait just 1 june to see the level of sales....as i said people are too focusing on level of royalty....level will make zero difference if most subs come from plan with 750 images or 350...we will get 10 cent despite the level 90% of time..

if the % off plan sold are less 750 350 and more 50 10 we can have a surprise. i don't think this is the scenario but at least june first we will know

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, LongJon said:

love adobe and it not sell bad, but people in my opinion are overrating the level of sale of adobe compared to ss....apart the fact they are losing sales during last period like if not worst than ss....but adobe at least for me , and i think many others, account mostly to 10 20% of ss. and considering ss can discount plan due to less royalty...make the maths, adobe will be in trouble soon and it will dampen a new scheme too to stay competitive....or we decide from tomorrow all together to dump ss istock 123rf and all the other agency in favour of pond and adobe or we won't survive.

If lots of good content disappears from SS, Adobe will surely become a leader

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is so typical of corporate arrogance and stupidity. By doing this they are admitting they have failed and do not know how to increase sales, be creative or cut costs other than to destroy the hand that literally feeds them. If I were a shareholder, I would run to the exit. They have access to some of the most creative minds on the planet but do they utilize that and ask them for suggestions on how to advance marketing and sales? Hell no! Let’s just cut costs the only way that we “brilliant” corporate managers know how. I worked in the corporate world and this is the mentality. The emperor has no clothes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BusinessIllustrator said:

Ясно. В таком случае вы испортите свое здоровье и вам конкуренцию в жизни составят более здоровые люди. В случае с рекламой в инстаграмме, выиграют ваши конкуренты которые используют хорошую картинку. 

Не спорьте с голубем.

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

If lots of good content disappears from SS, Adobe will surely become a leader

you come from ukraine....how much is minimum salary in ukraine right now? how many contributor live there and how many content come from there every day? do you think in country like yours with 200 dollar minimum salary many contributor will dump their only way to survive , even if will be 300 400 dollar now compared to 1000 1500 , to risk to sell in adobe only? unfortunately it will not happen...nobody will dump  their folio before others do...the only one who will dump are those who not live out of micro stock and don't care of this...but for full time even dumping 400 500 month right now is impossible....adobe is not telling enough and won't sell enough even if ss will lose 100 million content in a day.

there is already istock who is outperforming adobe in level of sale and they sell photo for 1 cent, and they have 200 million images....the big difference is that for many ss is by far the biggest seller, so people didn't bother with istock selling at one cent, but got crazy with ss because they account for 80% of sale.

so i will wait june fist and check most of portfolio of people dumping their images...i bet mostly are amateur with a 1000 files who not rely on stock as main source

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...