If they are old images that haven't sold before, they may be part of the deal that Sstock did quite a while ago, where all those unused old images are put into a 'pool' and the users have unlimited access.

Stating the obvious, but as a contributor 10 cent royalties on a sale are near worthless. The only thing that generates any kind of income are the relatively sparse sales that provide two orders of magnitude greater royalties. I wonder for SS how this maps out?
In other words if SS only income was from the packages they sold (that generate 10 cent royalties for us) how much would their revenue decline percentage-wise?...would it be equivalently devastating to SS bottom line?

Who cares what Shutterstock are paying, because whatever it is, anyone with half a brain can see that Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovskare are ripping off those who upload.

Ask yourself 10c, LOL, even in the deepest recesses of the lowest paid people on Earth this is unacceptable.

Personally, I don't give my talent away for FREE, but, many people still do, STOP UPLOADING and get that inner satisfying feeling that you are doing the right thing.

Who cares what Shutterstock are paying, because whatever it is, anyone with half a brain can see that Jon Oringer and his side kick Stan Pavlovskare are ripping off those who upload.

Ask yourself 10c, LOL, even in the deepest recesses of the lowest paid people on Earth this is unacceptable.

Personally, I don't give my talent away for FREE, but, many people still do, STOP UPLOADING and get that inner satisfying feeling that you are doing the right thing.

Ok, I'll ask myself. Is 10c acceptable? Well you need to qualify it with a timescale to start with, or it means absolutely nothing. But hey, that's not important right... who cares if anything we say works or makes sense... as long as we can proudly shout our anger from the rooftops to anyone who will listen, right?!

But I digress... ok, 10c a second are we going for? That works for me! 10c a sale after expenses? Well that generates Coca Cola billions of dollars a year... so 10c sounds wonderful! But let's go out on a limb and assume you're taking about the most common lowest denominator when it comes to earnings... per hour. Ok... so full time that would equate to $17.33  month. That's a pretty terrible salary.

But we don't get a salary. You know that, right? Also, hardly anybody earns less than $17 a month (unless they have a super small portfolio or only submit to all the wrong agencies), and SS aren't paying us 10c an hour. Or anything 'an hour' to be fair.

You can pull out your false equivalencies all you like, and you're welcome to hate SS and not submit to them, but there's no need to keep banging on about it at any opportunity. You're like the stereotypical embodiment of a vegan...

Me: Hello, do have the time?
You: Jon Oringer is a Crook
Me: Erm... what?!

I think you should remove all your content from SS to reduce your stress levels and avoid being seen as a hypocrite. Take up yoga, try some meditation, cut down on your Microstock Group visits and you'll probably reduce your odds of hypertension considerably.

*I've not really encountered this stereotype and I think there's nothing wrong with being a vegan... just to be clear.

I was always apprehensive about the SOD sales as there is no way of knowing exactly how they are being licensed. I didn't mind too much at first as they were usually a good price, often much better than ELs which they seem to have replaced. But I have noticed that  I get mostly less than a dollar for them now with the odd rare exception and I too have had a few of the 10 cent ones. I, for one was much happier with the old system where you knew what you were getting for each type of license.