Paid downloads rose 14% Y/Y in Q2, and revenue/download 13%. The size of Shutterstock's library rose 11% Q/Q and 47% Y/Y to 57.2M images.

Adobe competition or investors wake up to over priced stock?

If earnings dropped while revenue rose then their costs have increased.  They certainly haven't increased what they pay us so it must be somewhere else - too much for top management?  Too many employee perks?

I think the stock was overvalued and due for a drop but the magnitude of it that fast was surprising - maybe all of the insiders saw it coming and cashed out their options.

Good news. A destructive system loses power.

"With more contributors than ever uploading their best content and a state-of-the-art processing operation and best images 24 hours a day, seven days a week, we believe we are well positioned to scale the supply-side of our marketplace for years to come."

I simply can't see how that can turn out to be true.   I have a hard time imagining who would even be continuing to submit microstock at all, in years to come. 
 

I don't know about everyone else, but i started to to have doubts about shutterstock about a year ago. It probably is due to a fact that they admit to continue selling cheap to gain market share while the quality of the images rises. istock started at 10 cents a download but they adjusted their price along the years to reflect the quality at least. Did shutterstock raise their's? I am not sure on this matter.
I also bought shares of shutterstock when they were originally in the 40s and sold them in mid 90's when the Getty free images hoopla happened. I felt the general consensus among many of the members here turn from yay to boo around the same time my feelings turned south. In my view, there has been no positive news for contributors lately.
The market isn't stupid. This business model depends on crowdsourcing. The market see the pitchforks being sharpened by its contributors and many are voicing their complaints. I think the stock reflects the overall contributor mood which is going south...

A possible cost factor for SS that must have increased dramatically is the cost of reviewing images. Based on their new (irrational) review strategy the average review cost per accepted images must have doubled in recent times since a large percentage of accepted images were probably reviewed at least twice before acceptance.

I don't know about everyone else, but i started to to have doubts about shutterstock about a year ago. It probably is due to a fact that they admit to continue selling cheap to gain market share while the quality of the images rises. istock started at 10 cents a download but they adjusted their price along the years to reflect the quality at least. Did shutterstock raise their's? I am not sure on this matter.
I also bought shares of shutterstock when they were originally in the 40s and sold them in mid 90's when the Getty free images hoopla happened. I felt the general consensus among many of the members here turn from yay to boo around the same time my feelings turned south. In my view, there has been no positive news for contributors lately.

The market isn't stupid. This business model depends on crowdsourcing. The market see the pitchforks being sharpened by its contributors and many are voicing their complaints. I think the stock reflects the overall contributor mood which is going south...

You summed it up well and I agree. My enthusiasm took a real hit when I read these comments from Shutterstock Management when they presented at the Goldman Sachs US Emerging Cap Growth Conference.

Shutterstock publicly admitted that they have purposely chosen not to raise prices as a business strategy to gain market share. Shutterstock has also stated that they will continue to price undercut the competition as a long term business road path.

"We haven�t raised prices in many years and then been a great strategy so far to grow."


Snip
Duck Swartz

So what�s changed in the marketplace that�s giving you the opportunity to locate in the enterprise in a more, in a more robust way?
Timothy E. Bixby - CFO

The quality of the images has increased pretty dramatically over the past 10 years

So in the past five years the contents gone up to a level where the biggest publishers in the world mediated either starting to notice that is price, these images are not only price well, but they are also similar to some images that they have paid thousands of dollars for and also had to be on the phone for an hour negotiating the license for that image.

Snip

Duck Swartz

Talking about your present strategy longer term?

Timothy E. Bixby - CFO

We think we can raise the prices over the long term but we�re primary in the growth mode right now and we would like to continue to cover as much of the world as possible and take as much as growth in the business that we can before we play with the pricing level.

We haven�t raised prices in many years and then been a great strategy so far to grow.

Snip
Jonathan Oringer - Founder, CEO & Chairman of the Board

It still multiples. So it's order of magnitude whether it's if you look at us compared to other stock marketplaces like an iStock or others, it's two or three or four times more expensive to not use Shutterstock. If you look at the higher end sort of more traditional marketed might be 6 or 8 or 10 times more expensive.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1841072-shutterstocks-management-presents-at-the-goldman-sachs-us-emerging-smid-cap-growth-conference-transcript?page=2&p=qanda&l=last

Just to add to their review and response-to-queries' costs, it appears that the "categories missing" problem has resurfaced. I got a rejection for "Incorrect category" and when I submitted a query, I got a response (which appears to be written in a hurry), that only the title had the relevant information. This had led me to infer that my categories that appeared to be intact at the time of submission, had vanished in their system after that.

So, for now, I am telling myself to double-check all items (categories / illustration flag etc.) just prior to submitting the images. Beyond that, we cannot do much

Not surprised. The only way you're going to make money on Shutterstock is if you short the stock as it continues to fall. It still has a P/E ratio of 60 so it's still overpriced. Also as the news of Adobe getting into the game starts to sink in, more people will be looking at the figures more closely and asking more questions about the marketplace. Jon Oringer is going to be in for a fun ride as he deals with angry investors seeking answers to their losing investments. Oh well, you live by the sword... If you want to buy a stock, you'd be better off buying Apple instead. (Adobe is also overpriced)

This just in, someone at Cantor Fitzgerald has been taking cat drugs: "Cantor Fitzgerald Analyst Reaffirmed $72.0 Price Target on Shutterstock (NYSE:SSTK) stock, While Reiterating Buy Rating" - Sweet mother of god...

http://www.octafinance.com/cantor-fitzgerald-analyst-reaffirmed-72-0-price-target-on-shutterstock-nysesstk-stock-while-reiterating-buy-rating/

Shutterstock (SSTK) Stock Downgraded at Jefferies

Snip

Downgraded to "hold" from "buy" at Jefferies, which cut price target to $39 from $90.

http://www.thestreet.com/story/13249151/1/shutterstock-sstk-stock-downgraded-at-jefferies.html


Shutterstock (NYSE:SSTK) Was Downgraded by Analysts at RBC Capital

Snip

Shutterstock (NYSE:SSTK)�s rating was cut by stock analysts at RBC Capital from a �Sector Perform� rating to a �Outperform� rating in a research report issued on Wednesday morning.

The stock downgrade is probably noticed by stock traders, as NYSE:SSTK is now trading -2.24% lower at $33.65 as of 07:13 New York time. Shutterstock shares have declined -54.5% in the last 200 days, while the S&P500 Index has risen 7.02% in the same time period.

http://www.octafinance.com/shutterstock-nysesstk-was-downgraded-by-analysts-at-rbc-capital-to-a-outperform-rating/

Quote from: gbalex on August 08, 2015, 08:07

Too bad one of the analyst did not ask about shutterstocks "state-of-the-art processing operation". It would be interesting to hear how they describe it to the financial crowd.

analyst are no better than weather station ppl predicting the weather.
those of us old enough to have started investing in the 80s would remember there was a bunch of experts who made alot of money as teachers of investing. i was one of those who bought their lessons.
later they started an investment company, so we all went in big time since they were all experts.
we lost big time as well.  the only ppl who actually make money in stock market are the sales agents.
and the inside traders. everybody else are brought in for the roller coaster ride, just so wall st continues to make money as the rest of us lost our pants off our retirement savings.

I was more interested in how shutterstock would sell themselves to market investors re "state-of-the-art processing operation"

You say you never sold yourself out. Its guys like Jon, or the suits at Getty that have absolutely no respect for creativity that really sold you out.

Very well said, and right on the money� or lack thereof.

I was more interested in how shutterstock would sell themselves to market investors re "state-of-the-art processing operation"

yes, we used to have FRED for everything state of the art in IT.
today ss has ATILLA 

Quote from: Sean Locke Photography on August 06, 2015, 12:03

Ouch.  Good thing I only put a couple hundred in there.  Time to buy more?

You gotta be kidding me. P/E is still sky high and the stock market bubble is about to burst.

Far over the real value. People like my Grandmother jumped on this and pushed it up. SSTK is bound to come back to a realistic price in a big adjustment. This could be it.