Jump to content

Enhanced License change follow up


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 163
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

"Therefore, in order to offer more price flexibility for enhanced licences, we had to create more flexibility in enhanced licence payouts"   So, in English then, SS wants to offer huge discounts to

To our contributor community: As always, we appreciate your feedback and acknowledge that in our communication of January 22nd we didn’t clearly explain our rationale for making changes to the enhan

"As you have noted here in the contributor forums, our enhanced license sales have been coming under pressures of late"   Paul, the reason for that is because you have increased the print-run to 50

Before the changes to the EL payouts were announced, I was getting an EL sale almost every other day. Which is what kept my monthly earnings only about 1/3 less than the same months previous year, since I have seen barely anything from SODs at all (save for an odd $0.69 sale here and there, and 4.35 sale approx. twice a month), since my OD downloads have tanked big time over the past year or so and since my overall sales have been taking a nosedive ever since around September 2014 - January 2015.

 

After I was informed I should receive less per EL but to expect plenty more ELs in future, because it is now all more flexible and SS is now gonna be able to 'drive more downloads' my way too - I haven't had a single EL sale. Not one. So, in my book, SS managed to drive even those downloads away from me, after successfully driving the subscription downloads, the ODDs and SODs away.

 

Whatever you guys are doing, please stop - it is NOT working. At least not for the majority of us, common contributors without the special status at SS.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they do reduce prices for ELs or offer higher discounted package deals, why not reduce the print run allowed within an EL - at least that way the number of ELs may actually go up. For example, at present a customer wants a print run of 100k, or 250k or 500k they but a "standard" EL at whatever discount package price and we receive our reduced % of the price paid per purchase. Why not introduce a tiered print run for ELs and customers pay set prices dependent on print run (or other terms required)?

 

As already stated by a few, an EL requirement is not driven by price, it is driven by the need - how many prints does the customer need? If we are to be paid on our earnings level why can customers not be charged on their print level? Obviously this would mean the higher the print run the higher price paid by the customer e.g. 100k print run $75 per image, 250k print run $100, 500k print run $150, etc.

 

Possibly from this the customer gets a better deal for lower print runs working up to higher print runs, we get paid 30% of set prices on ELs. SS get more  EL purchases rather than sub purchases for current print runs up to 500k, customer pays less for lower print runs and we get paid a wider range of commissions dependent on size of print run.

 

Just thinking out loud.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got $24 for one "new" EL and $17.86 for another, which equals $80 and $59.50 on the buyers' side - or better "would equal", as from what I see the pricing hasn't been changed yet. But I still have no idea, what exactly this calculation is based on. Is there a chart or something showing where these royalties actually come from?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just see a downward spiral of poor decisions which will just impact on contributors.

 

As the blog mentioned above rightly points out :(

 

The blog does not point that out. If anything, the blogger who wrote that piece is an apologist for SS, even going so far as to call anyone who disagrees with decisions like the one it handed down recently as being "naive."

Link to post
Share on other sites

My favourite Blogger Lee Torrens gives his spin on the pay cut http://www.microstockdiaries.com/shutterstock-explains-royalty-cut-is-to-enable-price-cut.html

 

So you agree with SS's decision, then? Because he does, too. He thinks that it "makes sense" what SS is doing to compete with Adobe. It's driving sales away from the highest tier earners and shifting them to the lowest ones, so it can pay out less royalties for the same types of images made by those in the highest tier. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't come over as being an apologist for SS

 

"Their “extensive testing” found that the best strategy to increase volume was to… wait for it… cut prices.  Genius!"

 

and

 

"What I can’t believe is that they’re telling contributors they’ll make up the lower royalty with higher volume, #4 on the list of eye-roll inducing agency lines."

 

the rest of the blog post just stated the situation

Yep. Lee's blog is always a good read. He's been an "insider" of the microstock industry for about a decade and knows what he's talking about. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you agree with SS's decision, then? Because he does, too. He thinks that it "makes sense" what SS is doing to compete with Adobe. It's driving sales away from the highest tier earners and shifting them to the lowest ones, so it can pay out less royalties for the same types of images made by those in the highest tier. 

 

Not that your little rant deserves a reply, but here goes.  You can read "My favourite Blogger Lee Torrens" sarcastically of literally, both would be correct.  Some might find him blunt and straight forward, I personally find him rude, which may well be your problem with him?  He also may sometimes write from a bit of an industry slant, I don't find such a bias a problem, if I was only to read articles coming from my own perspective I wouldn't learn much would I.  You misquote him when you say  "He thinks that it "makes sense"" when in fact he says "From the agency perspective, this makes a lot of sense."   Most of his comments I would construe as negative towards Shutterstock if not stirring the dirt. 

 

As for your remarks regarding the lower and higher tiers, I'm probably correct in assuming you don't mind if things favour the latter.  I find the whole tier thing a device used by the agencies to divide and rule and you would be an example of this working in practice.  I say get rid of anything that divides us.

Who took the biggest hit in this pay cut, the lowest tier.   Instead of giving them your support you allow that divide to get the better of you.

Finally to answer your original question "So you agree with SS's decision, then?" you can read all my posts in my profile, you won't find any love lost there, I'm opted out, are you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that your little rant deserves a reply, but here goes.

 

I wasn't ranting. You posted a link to a blog about this situation. I then asked you if you agreed with him, since it was unclear to me as to whether you really understood what his position was or whether you were misconstruing it. Judging from your later response, it seems that you misconstrued what he was saying. This was not a "Rah rah down with SS post." The post was saying in so many words, "This was a perfectly sound and logical business decision given the competition from Adobe."

 

I didn't misquote anyone. It's clear from his later comment to another poster that he's an apologist for SS and this type of price cutting practice in general. He not only tells a poster to his entry in so many words that contributors are being "naive" for getting upset over policy decisions like the one SS just instituted, he says that people running microstock agencies know what they're doing. He then later says that price cutting works. You don't literally have to say, "I am an apologist," to be an apologist. You can read between the lines.

 

BTW, word of advice, try actually reading what people are saying using a neutral voice, rather than projecting your own state of mind onto them and imagining they're ranting at you when you are the one in the ranting state of mind. You are the ranter here. Not me.

 

As for your remarks regarding the lower and higher tiers, I'm probably correct in assuming you don't mind if things favour the latter.  I find the whole tier thing a device used by the agencies to divide and rule and you would be an example of this working in practice.  

 

This response literally makes no sense, but that's what happens when you respond to someone in an angry state of mind. You just spout gibberish in a desperate attempt to make a "dig" at the person, however nonsensical. Another word of advice, learn to count to ten before responding. It'll do you wonders. I promise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

He didn't come over as being an apologist for SS

 

"Their “extensive testing” found that the best strategy to increase volume was to… wait for it… cut prices.  Genius!"

 

and

 

"What I can’t believe is that they’re telling contributors they’ll make up the lower royalty with higher volume, #4 on the list of eye-roll inducing agency lines."

 

the rest of the blog post just stated the situation

 

Yes, that's exactly right. The entirety of the post is saying, "Hey, I can totally believe why SS would do something like this. Adobe is undercutting SS, so SS is striking back by shifting sales from higher tier earners onto the lower tier ones. What I can't believe is the line of bull that SS is now giving its contributors to accept this policy decision, that they're going to see higher sales."

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't ranting. You posted a link to a blog about this situation. I then asked you if you agreed with him, since it was unclear to me as to whether you really understood what his position was or whether you were misconstruing it. Judging from your later response, it seems that you misconstrued what he was saying. This was not a "Rah rah down with SS post." The post was saying in so many words, "This was a perfectly sound and logical business decision post given the competition from Adobe."

 

I didn't misquote anyone. It's clear from his later comment to another poster that he's an apologist for SS and this type of price cutting practice in general. He not only tells a poster to his entry in so many words that contributors are being "naive" for getting upset over policy decisions like the one SS just instituted, he says that people running microstock agencies know what they're doing. He then later says that price cutting works. You don't literally have to say, "I am an apologist," to be an apologist. You can read between the lines.

 

BTW, word of advice, try actually reading what people are saying using a neutral voice, rather than projecting your own state of mind onto them and imagining they're ranting at you when you are the one in the ranting state of mind. 

 

 

This response literally makes no sense, but that's what happens when you respond to someone in an angry state of mind. You just spout gibberish. Another word of advice, learn to count to ten before responding. It'll do you wonders. I promise.

 

I read you read, this doesn't move things forward and nobody wants to look at the forum and see bickering about semantics.  I'm opted out, are you with us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone get more EL downloads recently? Might be a lucky coincidence but i sold more El´s in the last week than normally in a few months.

From those that have posted I think you are the only one who is getting more ELs. The rest are about the same or less. Glad to hear that someone is getting more. Please keep us posted if your trend continues.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To our contributor community:

As always, we appreciate your feedback and acknowledge that in our communication of January 22nd we didn’t clearly explain our rationale for making changes to the enhanced license payment structure - with that in mind I would like to share more detail regarding the change.

As you have noted here in the contributor forums, our enhanced license sales have been coming under pressures of late and we have been looking at multiple ways to improve the volume of these downloads as they offer much higher priced payouts to you.

We are constantly testing new packages and payment structures for customers with the objective to increase downloads and improve your overall payouts.

Through extensive research, we discovered that the offering which led to the greatest increase in downloads involves providing more flexibility to the price of enhanced licences. No other offering came close. Therefore, in order to offer more price flexibility for enhanced licences, we had to create more flexibility in enhanced licence payouts. The most effective way to do this was to align the enhanced licence payouts with our standard Shutterstock payout terms.

We strongly believe that you will see your payouts from Shutterstock increase over the coming months.

Our success is linked to your success and we will continue to improve our marketplace to attract new and more enterprise customers as well as increase the downloads of existing customers.

I hope this offers more insight to these changes. As always we value your contributions and opinions. If you have any questions, please reach out to us through our support team.

Paul Brennan

Thanks for the news And promotion opportunities

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...