Jump to content
Kate Shutterstock

New earnings structure for Contributors

Recommended Posts

On 5/28/2020 at 12:56 AM, Phil Lowe said:

Screw it.  Turning off my image port now.  It will take 72 hours to vacate anyway.  Remember: you have a voice in this.  Vote with your port.  Vote "No".

2020-05-27_18-55-04.thumb.jpg.28f50d93d7d51098c8e6d7fcb6dde7a3.jpg

who’s going to join the strike for monday? I’m switching of my portfolio now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May looks like it may be half decent after some terrible results earlier in the year. I was hoping for a continuing upturn.

Now to be decimated.

Can't believe it.

And with that stinking reset to Level 1 motivation and reward also reset to Level 1.

Abandon hope all ye who enter here....SS new motto for contributors?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, HHelene said:

There already are platforms, like Photoshelter, where you pay a monthly fee for servers, shop and so on.

    Firstly, one platform is needed, and not differentiated. and be exactly exclusive, so as not to dump on shallow drains, too. one platform is important in order for a huge library to form; it is convenient for the client to search in one place.
    Secondly, it is desirable that this is new from scratch. and all shares of the platform belonged to the authors, depending on the popularity of their images and videos, without the right to resell their shares. any other platform will sooner or later turn into Shutterstock and will use us for its own purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dacascas said:

Jon Oringer leaved the Shutterstock, and took away all conscience!

He is still Chairman of the Board and the biggest shareholder. So all this has his blessing. He just was clever enough to move to the backstage before all this. He knew what was coming and didn't want to give his face to it.

"Although I’ll be stepping back from the day-to-day, I’m not going away! I will remain Chairman of the Board and continue to be a resource and advisor to Stan. As Executive Chairman and as the largest shareholder, I plan to continue to be involved in the strategy and direction of the business including yearly planning, regular off-sites, M&A, capital allocation, and other large initiatives."

Jon Oringer Feb 13 2020  -> https://medium.com/@jonoringer/same-commitment-different-role-3ff3c5eb384

 

I just wish that the current CEO would show some leadership and steps in front of the contributors and say something. Instead he stays quiet and forces the employees who don't have anything to do with these decisions to take all the crap. Come on! What kind of leadership is that!? 

Stan Pavlovsky! Step forward!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Marianne Campolongo said:

I signed the petition and shared it with my 7,200+ followers on twitter since many are journalists and others are fellow stock photographers, using the #boycottshutterstock hashtag -  the hashtag suggestion came up near the top before I finished typing "boycott" so that's promising. I'm not sure if any of this will change shutterstock's mind but we will certainly fail if we don't even try. 

the petition (at the moment at least) stands at 3505 signatures. not a huge turnout or rather pathetic result if I wanna be honest : (. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AlphaNature said:

    Firstly, one platform is needed, and not differentiated. and be exactly exclusive, so as not to dump on shallow drains, too. one platform is important in order for a huge library to form; it is convenient for the client to search in one place.
    Secondly, it is desirable that this is new from scratch. and all shares of the platform belonged to the authors, depending on the popularity of their images and videos, without the right to resell their shares. any other platform will sooner or later turn into Shutterstock and will use us for its own purposes.

I think there are ways to avoid this last part. I mean, I've always dreamed of being rich, simply so that I can actually do good with the money. I'm the kind of person who gives food to homeless people when I only have a few dollars in the bank myself. We need somebody with this kind of mentality to run a stock site. Somebody who is actually an artist and a stock contributor, someone who understands the plight, and above all else, someone who would never even consider screwing over artists - even if it means tons of cash in their pocket.

I have been thinking about working towards starting this kind of website, but from the research that I've done, it's difficult. How do we pay contributors 60%+ while still being able to pay for marketing to compete with the big giants, pay for the website and hosting of the images online, etc? I am sure it's possible, if we get together a group of really intelligent and determined people. But possible and easy are not the same, and from what I've seen on the microstockgroup forum, there's a lot of obstacles to overcome. But hey, if anyone wants to band together and start something, and wants a strong leader who won't sell out & won't accept underpaying artists, I'm always down for trying something new 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the first week since i started in micro that i dont upload content to Shutterstock. All my new work will be on Adobe in first place and secondly in other places. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most interesting thing is that Shutterstock made a huge gift to other stocks. Many drains have now received a huge influx of many authors. It's so funny - Shutterstock is digging its own grave, but other microstocks will be burying it. This is not what we all as authors would like to wish for shatterstock and we are very sorry for it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, AlphaNature said:

    Firstly, one platform is needed, and not differentiated. and be exactly exclusive, so as not to dump on shallow drains, too. one platform is important in order for a huge library to form; it is convenient for the client to search in one place.
    Secondly, it is desirable that this is new from scratch. and all shares of the platform belonged to the authors, depending on the popularity of their images and videos, without the right to resell their shares. any other platform will sooner or later turn into Shutterstock and will use us for its own purposes.

I agree that would be better. The question is, can we do it, and could we make it stand out among all other sites? We need digital skills to set up the business and advertising in first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Jarmo Piironen said:

He is still Chairman of the Board and the biggest shareholder. So all this has his blessing. He just was clever enough to move to the backstage before all this. He knew what was coming and didn't want to give his face to it.

"Although I’ll be stepping back from the day-to-day, I’m not going away! I will remain Chairman of the Board and continue to be a resource and advisor to Stan. As Executive Chairman and as the largest shareholder, I plan to continue to be involved in the strategy and direction of the business including yearly planning, regular off-sites, M&A, capital allocation, and other large initiatives."

Jon Oringer Feb 13 2020  -> https://medium.com/@jonoringer/same-commitment-different-role-3ff3c5eb384

 

I just wish that the current CEO would show some leadership and steps in front of the contributors and say something. Instead he stays quiet and forces the employees who don't have anything to do with these decisions to take all the crap. Come on! What kind of leadership is that!? 

Stan Pavlovsky! Step forward!

 

This is the best comment I've read on this long thread.

"He is still Chairman of the Board and the biggest shareholder. So all this has his blessing."

You are right of course but in my heart he is not the one I blame, the pressure is huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Patricio_Murphy said:

I have a rather unimpressive portfolio myself, but the answer was more or less the same, copy&paste the same BS.

They key here is that they're trying to convince us that it's better to earn less than before but have the potential to earn more than before. It's plain stupid and it pisses me off the fact that they treat me as stupid. 

The scheme is totally unfair. If you make good sales, say 1000 a month, you get to tier 4 after the first month, there may be no difference for you, you're in the 30% really fast. I assume from what I usually read here that there is a little amount of contributors that make it to tier 5 nowadays and expect a 5% increase over the previous scheme, and even less than will ever get to tier 6, and I seriously doubt many will get there very fast (how many people sell by the thousands/month these days?). But say you're starting and sell about 100 images a month or less, your little earning gets reduced, it will take you several months to get top where you are, that "greater earnings potential" means nothing to you, since when you get to the 30% you used to gain you're demoted and start over again. I repeat: the Greeks gods had a curse placed to Sisyphus that was just like this, once he made it with the stone to the top of the mountain, he was sent back and had to start over again. What for the Greek gods was a curse SS tries to convince us that it's an encouragement to work harder. So we, the little ones, are the obvious losers, but if you're big you also lose, because if you get 25000 downloads a year, it gets reset to 0 at the start of the new year and you have to work your way up. So they will keep some of the money you are getting now for one or two months. I wonder what's better about that scheme.

Basically, if you have a good portfolio and your sales are average you may be OK, you'll be in the 30% tier soon and perhaps earn a little more by the end of the year before being thrown down again. But, correct me if I'm wrong, if you're in either extreme of the chain, you're most likely screwed. Now that's rewarding performance!

well, selling 100 clips per month is a lot and I never sold that much .... and I would be rich ;O) That is not the case and my portfolio is very specific .... but an all time seller ...some times more, sometimes less, but kind of stable ... next month I would loose 5% per sale, but I think I will take my portfolio off, ...just to give a signal

 

Share this post


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

I agree that would be better. The question is, can we do it, and could we make it stand out among all other sites? We need digital skills to set up the business and advertising in first place.

It is we who create the goods which stocks sell, the stock order the rest of the work. They hire marketers, programmers, lawyers, and a server. I am sure that spending on this is not more than 20 percent.

And there is one important detail. We have no other option. If this is not done, then prices fall so quickly that any of our images will become cheaper than the cost of electricity per click on this image. And then you should not do this and leave.

Share this post


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

It is we who create the goods which stocks sell, the stock order the rest of the work. They hire marketers, programmers, lawyers, and a server. I am sure that spending on this is not more than 20 percent.

And there is one important detail. We have no other option. If this is not done, then prices fall so quickly that any of our images will become cheaper than the cost of electricity per click on this image. And then you should not do this and leave.

:))) " cost of electricity per click " that is good one, ofcourse it can be done, upwork provides enough specialists in any field you could imagine, main issue is to get enough people, crowdfunding it maybe or our own donations. imagine if each of us will donate some % of their few next months, or just couple bucks ... 

Share this post


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

This is the first week since i started in micro that i dont upload content to Shutterstock. All my new work will be on Adobe in first place and secondly in other places. 

 

That's good news. Unfortunately, the rest of us already have the same port on AS and other agencies too, so there is nothing to gain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Maxal Tamor said:

Maybe, but when 100 other with a portfolio like your will have disabled their portfolios maybe they will begin to care…

soory for the typos .... was kind of excited ;O)  ...yes, you are right and I will most likely disable my portfolio the 1st of June ... even I am "only" loosing 5% for this year .... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This new structure is insulting to us contributors. We work very hard and spend money in order to produce our images and videos. We’re always trying to produce new content, as that’s an essential component to generating sales. So your rationalization that setting everyone back to Level l each January 1 is designed to motivate people to quickly produce fresh content,  is false—and you know it  

If you think that making everyone start at Level l every January is going to motivate people, you’re sadly mistaken. Your best contributors with the most sales are going to leave Shutterstock. Many of your contributors will leave, because you’ve given them no incentive to STAY. 

You just shot yourselves in the foot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ammit Jack said:

:))) " cost of electricity per click " that is good one, ofcourse it can be done, upwork provides enough specialists in any field you could imagine, main issue is to get enough people, crowdfunding it maybe or our own donations. imagine if each of us will donate some % of their few next months, or just couple bucks ... 

I created a store for myself. https://alphanature.myinstaclip.com/ This service is 8-10 percent of the sale.  The rest of the profit is mine. But there are no sales, the client will not remember every such small store, and will not return in a year. If the base is large and the search is the same for everyone, then under good conditions, customers will come and the authors themselves will be interested in joining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2020 at 9:00 PM, Kate Shutterstock said:

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.

And here is how Shutterstock responds to COVID-19 outbreak! Highly disappointed. 
Who make these decisions in your company? Now, you can see a plummet in the deletion of contributor accounts! You'll only learn when potential content contributors step away from your company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/26/2020 at 7:50 PM, Phil Lowe said:

On your contributor dashboard, under your name in the upper right hand corner, go to account settings, then do this:

2020-05-26_13-47-24.thumb.jpg.d3ba1530983b2dd54738ace87317a701.jpg

i did this, doesn’t seem to work. or do i need to wait some time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DIRK VAN DER VEN MEDIA said:

i did this, doesn’t seem to work. or do i need to wait some time?

within 72 hours

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, YaromirM said:

NO! SS stock is going down...

Not only did I sell media, luckily only from few months, but also invested in SS stocks.

No sooner had I read this crappy piece of news than I've sold the stocks and started planning to shut down my account on the 1st.

For a moment I started believing that this business could somehow work out but it looks like it was merely a romantic disillution

It was fun until it lasted folks and I'm really sad as I'm saying that 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jasmin Awad said:

Adobe even offers successful contributors a yearly bonus where you get lightroom or even the entire creative suite for free for a year.

Completly different and supportive attitude towards creatives.

The hard reset every January is not just a move against contributors, but one against the creative user community and media creators who are Shutterstock customers.

It just makes no sense. 

Guess that's the difference between a creative company and a technology company

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Photography by Adri said:

I think there are ways to avoid this last part. I mean, I've always dreamed of being rich, simply so that I can actually do good with the money. I'm the kind of person who gives food to homeless people when I only have a few dollars in the bank myself. We need somebody with this kind of mentality to run a stock site. Somebody who is actually an artist and a stock contributor, someone who understands the plight, and above all else, someone who would never even consider screwing over artists - even if it means tons of cash in their pocket.

I have been thinking about working towards starting this kind of website, but from the research that I've done, it's difficult. How do we pay contributors 60%+ while still being able to pay for marketing to compete with the big giants, pay for the website and hosting of the images online, etc? I am sure it's possible, if we get together a group of really intelligent and determined people. But possible and easy are not the same, and from what I've seen on the microstockgroup forum, there's a lot of obstacles to overcome. But hey, if anyone wants to band together and start something, and wants a strong leader who won't sell out & won't accept underpaying artists, I'm always down for trying something new 😄

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, DIRK VAN DER VEN MEDIA said:

i did this, doesn’t seem to work. or do i need to wait some time?

If you have big portfolio, you have to wait a few days. My portfolio of 6000 images fully dissapeared in 2 days.

 

Share this post


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...