MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Monthly income poll updated and fixed *vote now*  (Read 10782 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #25 on: February 16, 2012, 21:32 »
0
wow.. looks like IS exclusives are running the poll :D


« Reply #26 on: February 16, 2012, 22:03 »
0
IS on top? Please tell me it's wrong...

Microstock Man

  • microstockman.com

« Reply #27 on: February 16, 2012, 22:22 »
0
I'm so confused by whats going on right now with the poll...

Hopefully by tomorrow it will have sorted itself all out and YayMicro will be at the top as it rightfully should be...
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 00:56 by THP »

« Reply #28 on: February 16, 2012, 23:10 »
0
IS on top? Please tell me it's wrong...

Given that Leaf added some higher numbers and that exclusives and independents are not separated, it would make sense that if exclusives are adding their votes, IS will almost always come out on top. Even if Sean doesn't vote :)

I think exclusives and independents need to have votes tallied separately and the comparison needs to be between the total of independents' earnings and exclusives' iStock earnings. Otherwise it won't tell us anything useful at the top end.

« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2012, 00:51 »
0
IS the first agency??? NO WAY this is possible.... like @jsnover say... maybe an independent pool for the exclusives is needed. Every indies on this forum can confirm that SS portfolio is earning more than IS.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 01:14 by nicku »

« Reply #30 on: February 17, 2012, 01:59 »
0
For me, IS + PP = SS, more or less (a couple of ELs can swing it either way). We know that iS pays out many times more than SS every month, so in one way it is still the top agency by miles.
I guess the figures show how thinly the payout is spread once it is split between a load of senior contributors. It amazes me that Fotolia is above DT, though it never got near that for me, and that Veer is anywhere near the middle tier.
Since the istock payout is multiplied several times over for exclusives their result does not reflect [payout/contributors], it is [payout x exclusive bonus level/contributors] which will skew the results and makes them meaningless. It would be much better to split iStock into two. The exclusive iStock reading would obviously come top, but the independent figure should show where it comes for them and comparison of the two might give an idea of how much benefit exclusivity has.

lagereek

« Reply #31 on: February 17, 2012, 02:27 »
0
Not sure but it can be very possible IS,  is in front, lets face it, every Joe Bloggs, exclusive at IS, can come and vote here, could be thousands for all we know plus all the ones casting dodgy votes.
Really these polls should be for indies or else we dont get a true picture, do we?

« Reply #32 on: February 17, 2012, 02:35 »
0
Not sure but it can be very possible IS,  is in front, lets face it, every Joe Bloggs, exclusive at IS, can come and vote here, could be thousands for all we know plus all the ones casting dodgy votes.
Really these polls should be for indies or else we dont get a true picture, do we?
Agree...

« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2012, 03:05 »
0
I think the easiest solution to this iStock problem might be to simply list iStock twice: iStock (Exclusive) and iStock (Independent) - whether that will result in anything meaningful is anyone's guess, but it'll more than likely paint a more accurate picture than the current one.

It's either that or exclude all data from exclusives.

ayzek

« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2012, 03:14 »
0
Leaf,
why dont we add an option for Direct Sales(personal websites).

« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2012, 03:24 »
0
Not sure but it can be very possible IS,  is in front, lets face it, every Joe Bloggs, exclusive at IS, can come and vote here, could be thousands for all we know plus all the ones casting dodgy votes.
Really these polls should be for indies or else we dont get a true picture, do we?
Agree...

Yeah, indies don't have huge biases, they are happy when they get money from any of the agencies and are likely to report accurately when this happens. Exclusives who have to defend their one and only agent by default are more likely to fiddle the truth.

traveler1116

« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2012, 03:35 »
0
Yeah, indies don't have huge biases, they are happy when they get money from any of the agencies and are likely to report accurately when this happens. Exclusives who have to defend their one and only agent by default are more likely to fiddle the truth.
Why?  What purpose would it serve to "fiddle the truth" we get paid in money not poll results don't we?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 03:38 by traveler1116 »

lagereek

« Reply #37 on: February 17, 2012, 04:02 »
0
Yeah, indies don't have huge biases, they are happy when they get money from any of the agencies and are likely to report accurately when this happens. Exclusives who have to defend their one and only agent by default are more likely to fiddle the truth.
Why?  What purpose would it serve to "fiddle the truth" we get paid in money not poll results don't we?

Not fiddle the truth as such but if you get enough exclusives reporting good earnings from IS, thats just one agency, right,  where as all indies are reporting from lots of differant agencies and this will give a false picture.
Besides, its pretty obvious that an exclusive is ofcourse bias towards his own agency.
In any event, these polls should really be for independants only,  since we are interested in the overall picture not just one agency.

also dont forget, most of us here have dumped IS, not even uploading!  so whats the point?
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 04:04 by lagereek »

« Reply #38 on: February 17, 2012, 04:06 »
0
Leaf,
why dont we add an option for Direct Sales(personal websites).

That wouldn't convey any information. Some people have good marketing/self-promotion skills, others don't. Every result will be different for completely diffierent reasons and the average will mean nothing.

« Reply #39 on: February 17, 2012, 04:08 »
0
Leaf,
why dont we add an option for Direct Sales(personal websites).

That wouldn't convey any information. Some people have good marketing/self-promotion skills, others don't. Every result will be different for completely diffierent reasons and the average will mean nothing.

I think it would be interesting to see how many people are making it work.. if the 'direct sales' start to creep up the poll it means a lot of people are doing something right...

« Reply #40 on: February 17, 2012, 04:13 »
0
Not sure but it can be very possible IS,  is in front, lets face it, every Joe Bloggs, exclusive at IS, can come and vote here, could be thousands for all we know plus all the ones casting dodgy votes.
Really these polls should be for indies or else we dont get a true picture, do we?
Agree...

Yeah, indies don't have huge biases, they are happy when they get money from any of the agencies and are likely to report accurately when this happens. Exclusives who have to defend their one and only agent by default are more likely to fiddle the truth.

Jeez

I for one have plenty other things to do with my life than fiddle the truth. I am sure the majority here have better things to do than play mind games.

« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2012, 04:22 »
0
Not sure but it can be very possible IS,  is in front, lets face it, every Joe Bloggs, exclusive at IS, can come and vote here, could be thousands for all we know plus all the ones casting dodgy votes.
Really these polls should be for indies or else we dont get a true picture, do we?
Agree...

Yeah, indies don't have huge biases, they are happy when they get money from any of the agencies and are likely to report accurately when this happens. Exclusives who have to defend their one and only agent by default are more likely to fiddle the truth.

Jeez

I for one have plenty other things to do with my life than fiddle the truth. I am sure the majority here have better things to do than play mind games.

Still doesn't explain why thread after thread, for so many months, of contributors complaining about massive income drops in their istock earnings, yet the poll shows no drop at all, not in the slightest.

« Reply #42 on: February 17, 2012, 04:28 »
0
Not sure but it can be very possible IS,  is in front, lets face it, every Joe Bloggs, exclusive at IS, can come and vote here, could be thousands for all we know plus all the ones casting dodgy votes.
Really these polls should be for indies or else we dont get a true picture, do we?
Agree...

Yeah, indies don't have huge biases, they are happy when they get money from any of the agencies and are likely to report accurately when this happens. Exclusives who have to defend their one and only agent by default are more likely to fiddle the truth.

Jeez

I for one have plenty other things to do with my life than fiddle the truth. I am sure the majority here have better things to do than play mind games.

Still doesn't explain why thread after thread, for so many months, of contributors complaining about massive income drops in their istock earnings, yet the poll shows no drop at all, not in the slightest.

it could be that the people with the largest income.. who see big drops, say from $4000 down to $200/month were still only able to vote at $1000 the whole time.  Hopefully this new set up helps a bit more and yes, I'll plan to sort out the exclusives / vs non-exclusives.

« Reply #43 on: February 17, 2012, 04:32 »
0
Leaf, can you please explain the results?

For instance, when SS is 100, how do you reach the result? Does it mean that the average income for each voter is $100? Or does it mean that on a scale of 100, SS reaches the top?

I haven't totally settled on how best to display the results yet (yesterday I was focusing on reworking the poll itself).. but this is how it works now.

I have chosen not to display the actual average of the votes because, simply, it means nothing.  If the avg. for site X was $1000 that doesn't mean the average microstocker is making $1000 or that you can expect to make $1000 on that site, it just means that for everyone who happened to vote the avg was $1000.  What that CAN tell is though, is something when compared to site Y who has an average of $500 ... site Y is earning half of what site X is for people (on average) and that is interesting.  Therefore, the top site is currently set at 100 and everything is organized below as a ratio of that.  So if Dreamstime is at 50 and Shutterstock is at 100 then people are (on average) earning half as much on Dreamstime as they are on Shutterstock.  The sites at 1 ... well, the earnings are pretty small to nill.

« Reply #44 on: February 17, 2012, 04:37 »
0
If what the poll does is simple avereges then the results will be heavly skewed (as can be seen already) towards IS since all exclusives will give some positive (and motsly high number) for IS and a 0 for the rest.

« Reply #45 on: February 17, 2012, 04:39 »
0
If what the poll does is simple avereges then the results will be heavly skewed (as can be seen already) towards IS since all exclusives will give some positive (and motsly high number) for IS and a 0 for the rest.

They should give 'no vote' for the rest - which isn't included in the results.  A 0 vote is different than a 'no vote' vote.  and yeah, i'm working at sorting out the exclusives.

« Reply #46 on: February 17, 2012, 04:42 »
0
Still doesn't explain why thread after thread, for so many months, of contributors complaining about massive income drops in their istock earnings, yet the poll shows no drop at all, not in the slightest.

it could be that the people with the largest income.. who see big drops, say from $4000 down to $200/month were still only able to vote at $1000 the whole time.  Hopefully this new set up helps a bit more and yes, I'll plan to sort out the exclusives / vs non-exclusives.

Thanks Leaf. I'm sure everyone appreciates your work on this. If so many people look to the poll and think it is a matter of fact, might as well try and get the best system there is.

« Reply #47 on: February 17, 2012, 04:49 »
0
@leaf

i suggest a control  poll (only for indies) regarding this matter.... include only IS,SS,DT,FT and 123RF. the question is simple:

Mark the fallowing agencies in order of income. ex. 1- SS , 2-IS , 3 DT,FT etc.... If the results will be similar to the actual pool than the new algorithm is representing the reality correctly.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 05:01 by nicku »

« Reply #48 on: February 17, 2012, 04:52 »
0
Well done Leaf.  Once the Exclusives are separated out I think the relative earnings between IS and SS will be more representative.

ayzek

« Reply #49 on: February 17, 2012, 05:53 »
0
Leaf,
why dont we add an option for Direct Sales(personal websites).

That wouldn't convey any information. Some people have good marketing/self-promotion skills, others don't. Every result will be different for completely diffierent reasons and the average will mean nothing.

Poll's current form doesnt show two of my big 4 seller which is Alamy and my site.

Microstock InsiderPhotoDune

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
12 Replies
1177 Views
Last post April 20, 2012, 17:07
by CD123
44 Replies
1991 Views
Last post February 05, 2013, 08:06
by Microbius
11 Replies
1466 Views
Last post July 23, 2013, 02:00
by MichaelJayFoto
5 Replies
576 Views
Last post March 20, 2014, 08:30
by leaf
19 Replies
1376 Views
Last post June 04, 2014, 16:46
by PaulieWalnuts

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors