| Author |
Message |
felix_casio
Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1102
Location: www.felixtm.com
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:50 pm
|  |
Guys, I think it will be a general raise not effected by your download amounts |
|
robyvannucci
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 80
Location: Lake of Garda - Italy
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:56 pm
| |
Thank you for the information. We will wait with great anticipation.
Roby from Italy |
|
Paul_Lewis
Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 4098
Location: Waterford, MI (Detroit)
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:05 pm
| |
Thanks, Shutterstock.
Always good news. |
|
pajson
Joined: 12 Aug 2005
Posts: 479
Location: Sweden, EU
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:12 pm
| |
I love SS
and
I love $$
;) |
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 19020
Location: Books and Class Info, www.rindersmithphotography.com or, www.rinderart.com
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:16 pm
| |
| Paul_Lewis wrote: | Thanks, Shutterstock.
Always good news. |
Ditto. |
|
Logos
Joined: 05 Feb 2005
Posts: 430
Location: Århus, Denmark
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:17 pm
| |
This announcement sounds great and will be very welcome. But:
However, for the commission increase to be enough to hold photographers like myself, it has to be substantial.
There is so much money to be made from putting up prices a lot. My average income per sold file is 1.1 USD on IS and my average on FT is over 4 USD net revenue.
SS has dropped from being my number one earner to my forth in one year, and it is only because of the commission and pricing structure. If SS should be my number one earner the commission should be about 1 USD per sold image and they would go even or so with IS and FT.
The next year will be a breaking point: It is up to SS and their ambition of future success: A low commission is like peeing in your pants to keep warm: It will give the agency a good profit in the sort run, but you will be losing revenue in the long run. The SS increase in prices last year of 70% and commission increase of only about 30% leaves SS with wet pants that have to be dried.
Imagine this: If you where an investor (I am myself) and you had just bought G for 2.6 billion. You would want to regain control over the price devaluation in stock photography and secure that high quality images was sold at a higher price. You would look at IS (owned by G), and the first conclusion would surely be to capture the best of the microstock photographers and make them exclusive to IS and push the prices up on the exclusive material. This would make it impossible for agencies like SS to compete because the return per images would be so much higher at IS. For SS to compete efficiently, the increase in commission must be as high as possible or IS will completely overtake the microstock market in just a few years from now.
Worst case scenario would be the same as last year: Very high increase in subscription price and a lower increase in contributor commission. I will be watching closely to see if the commission increase is proportional, or to make things right – higher, then the subscription price increase. |
|
nerus
Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 75
Location: http://www.nebuto.com
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:30 pm
| |
Ahh good news on a hard day :D
P.s I mean the first mail from shutterstock.
Last edited by nerus on Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:34 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
medveh
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Posts: 1577
Location: Transylvania
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:31 pm
| |
Very interesting Yuri, you probably see it on an other level than us and you're probably right, we'll see what shutterstock is really up to in a few months. |
|
stasvolik
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 909
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:36 pm
| |
Well, Laurin was right, and my skepticism was wrong. It's nice to know that another increase is coming, hopefully at the tier point that will be closer to where I am now ;)
Cheers,
Stas.
P.S. Interesting analysis from Yuri. |
|
digitalvision
Joined: 25 Oct 2005
Posts: 49
Location: Czech republic
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:42 pm
| |
Always welcome such good news. Impatient to see revealed all of the details later this spring. |
|
batman2000
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 100
Location: Panama, Rep. of Panama
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:59 pm
| |
Micros are priced tooo low to be sustainable. The time has come to see more money coming photographers way (model releases paper work and quality demanded from photographers should earn more money for the hassle involved).
Yuri is quite right, talent will (as is doing now) migrate to higher paying sites. The subscription model can accomodate both a price increase and a comission increase. Maybe it is time for SS to implement a credit model too.
Let's wait and see.
Last edited by batman2000 on Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:02 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
cwwmbm
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Posts: 1219
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:01 pm
| |
| Logos wrote: | This announcement sounds great and will be very welcome. But:
However, for the commission increase to be enough to hold photographers like myself, it has to be substantial.
There is so much money to be made from putting up prices a lot. My average income per sold file is 1.1 USD on IS and my average on FT is over 4 USD net revenue.
SS has dropped from being my number one earner to my forth in one year, and it is only because of the commission and pricing structure. If SS should be my number one earner the commission should be about 1 USD per sold image and they would go even or so with IS and FT.
The next year will be a breaking point: It is up to SS and their ambition of future success: A low commission is like peeing in your pants to keep warm: It will give the agency a good profit in the sort run, but you will be losing revenue in the long run. The SS increase in prices last year of 70% and commission increase of only about 30% leaves SS with wet pants that have to be dried.
Imagine this: If you where an investor (I am myself) and you had just bought G for 2.6 billion. You would want to regain control over the price devaluation in stock photography and secure that high quality images was sold at a higher price. You would look at IS (owned by G), and the first conclusion would surely be to capture the best of the microstock photographers and make them exclusive to IS and push the prices up on the exclusive material. This would make it impossible for agencies like SS to compete because the return per images would be so much higher at IS. For SS to compete efficiently, the increase in commission must be as high as possible or IS will completely overtake the microstock market in just a few years from now.
Worst case scenario would be the same as last year: Very high increase in subscription price and a lower increase in contributor commission. I will be watching closely to see if the commission increase is proportional, or to make things right – higher, then the subscription price increase. |
Totally with you here. SS stopped being my highest earner half a year ago and since then IS beats SS EVERY SINGLE DAY. If IS keeps growing the way it is now (while SS actually doesn't) I'll go exclusive sometimes this summer.
And once again, why SS wouldn't not introduce some kind of size-dependent prices? Say designer has 25 credits per day to spend, small size - 1 credit, medium size - 2 credits, large size - 3 credits, super size 4 credits? At least that would keep folks uploading max available size, not resizing like they start doing now.
And what's with the timing?! SS increase the prices for designers right before the busiest month in a year (March) but we get the rise only during the major slowdown of the sales (May-August)? Awesome. |
|
tacrafts
Joined: 01 Jul 2005
Posts: 310
Location: Cheddar, England.
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:06 pm
| |
| beaucroft wrote: | The new fees show quite a substantial increase, so my hope is:
.30- sub $500 level 1
.35- $500-1000 level 2
.40-$1000-2500 level 3
.45-$2500-5000 level 4
.50-$5000+ level 5 |
I think it may be good to do it the other way round to encourage new tallent and keep the old folk on their toes [unless you are scared of new tallent]
.50- sub $500 level 1
.45- $500-1000 level 2
.40-$1000-2500 level 3
.35-$2500-5000 level 4
.30-$5000+ level 5
Tim |
|
niserin
Joined: 11 May 2006
Posts: 228
Location: Poland
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:08 pm
| |
Yuri you are absolutely right. It is propably the most valuable post in this discussion.
Of course we will always be happy getting increase in the commision, but on the other hand we must be aware that SS increase price of subscription as well - in a little bit disproportionate way.
Hope in this year it will look different. |
|
stasvolik
Joined: 29 Jul 2005
Posts: 909
Location: Vancouver, BC
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26, 2008 4:54 pm
| |
| tacrafts wrote: | | beaucroft wrote: | The new fees show quite a substantial increase, so my hope is:
.30- sub $500 level 1
.35- $500-1000 level 2
.40-$1000-2500 level 3
.45-$2500-5000 level 4
.50-$5000+ level 5 |
I think it may be good to do it the other way round to encourage new tallent and keep the old folk on their toes [unless you are scared of new tallent]
.50- sub $500 level 1
.45- $500-1000 level 2
.40-$1000-2500 level 3
.35-$2500-5000 level 4
.30-$5000+ level 5
Tim |
Hmm, let's see... The assumption here is that the person who just got in with a digital compact is producing better images than, say, Yuri who chimed in a few posts back with his 39MP Hasselblad and excellent knowledge in lighting setup?
Cheers,
Stas. |
|
| |
|
Log in
