MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: $ 100 000 royalties?  (Read 17528 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: August 12, 2010, 09:02 »
0
In my case I know for a fact that since August 2005 I averaged .93 per download as a non-exclusive. You could almost double that as an exclusive, if this member has been exclusive the all time which is 1.86 x 19000 =$35340.  And then you would still need to figure the various cannister levels that this member went through as an exclusive, so 20-30K seems a good target. I would say this is max. Certainly not 100K. Denis

This logic is flawed.  I've been averaging well over $3 per download for a while no- assuming that someone is averaging the same and that the downloads are spread evenly for 4 years, you get 5,000 downloads in the past 365...thats 5000 x 3 (and they have a better cannister level) - that alone is $15,000.  I'm pretty sure that the photographer gets more than $3 per download because I'm not even gold yet. 

So you're telling me that 14,000 downloads = $10,000?

No chance.  At all.

Who's saying 10K? There's an additional 0 in the original thread that you're missing!

I agree that 100K is too high - I'd guess somewhere around the 45K mark would be closer to the mark.

You aren't following the simple math

Try again...

Therefore, if you want to follow simple math, how about answering my original question?

My logic is based on over 17200 downloads. On how many downloads are you making your assumption?  Denis


« Reply #51 on: August 12, 2010, 09:39 »
0
I'm basing my assumption on my one image that has half the downloads of that one image.  So, around $35k, probably.  Or whatever it was I said before.

« Reply #52 on: August 12, 2010, 09:53 »
0
In my case I know for a fact that since August 2005 I averaged .93 per download as a non-exclusive. You could almost double that as an exclusive, if this member has been exclusive the all time which is 1.86 x 19000 =$35340.  And then you would still need to figure the various cannister levels that this member went through as an exclusive, so 20-30K seems a good target. I would say this is max. Certainly not 100K. Denis

This logic is flawed.  I've been averaging well over $3 per download for a while no- assuming that someone is averaging the same and that the downloads are spread evenly for 4 years, you get 5,000 downloads in the past 365...thats 5000 x 3 (and they have a better cannister level) - that alone is $15,000.  I'm pretty sure that the photographer gets more than $3 per download because I'm not even gold yet. 

So you're telling me that 14,000 downloads = $10,000?

No chance.  At all.

Who's saying 10K? There's an additional 0 in the original thread that you're missing!

I agree that 100K is too high - I'd guess somewhere around the 45K mark would be closer to the mark.

You aren't following the simple math

Try again...

Therefore, if you want to follow simple math, how about answering my original question?

My logic is based on over 17200 downloads. On how many downloads are you making your assumption?  Denis

Almost 10000, of which 6000 have been exclusive.  So, umm, ya...whatever. 

« Reply #53 on: August 12, 2010, 10:07 »
0
In my case I know for a fact that since August 2005 I averaged .93 per download as a non-exclusive. You could almost double that as an exclusive, if this member has been exclusive the all time which is 1.86 x 19000 =$35340.  And then you would still need to figure the various cannister levels that this member went through as an exclusive, so 20-30K seems a good target. I would say this is max. Certainly not 100K. Denis

This logic is flawed.  I've been averaging well over $3 per download for a while no- assuming that someone is averaging the same and that the downloads are spread evenly for 4 years, you get 5,000 downloads in the past 365...thats 5000 x 3 (and they have a better cannister level) - that alone is $15,000.  I'm pretty sure that the photographer gets more than $3 per download because I'm not even gold yet. 

So you're telling me that 14,000 downloads = $10,000?

No chance.  At all.

Who's saying 10K? There's an additional 0 in the original thread that you're missing!

I agree that 100K is too high - I'd guess somewhere around the 45K mark would be closer to the mark.

You aren't following the simple math

Try again...

Therefore, if you want to follow simple math, how about answering my original question?

My logic is based on over 17200 downloads. On how many downloads are you making your assumption?  Denis

Almost 10000, of which 6000 have been exclusive.  So, umm, ya...whatever. 

Therefore...it appears that you are probably a bit more fortunate then the rest of us. Good for you. Denis

« Reply #54 on: August 12, 2010, 10:28 »
0
I'm basing my assumption on my one image that has half the downloads of that one image.  So, around $35k, probably.  Or whatever it was I said before.

In my case my best image, as a non-exclusive, with 2510 downloads, has an average of .99 per download.  My total downloads of all images bring it down to .93 per download. I guess the more downloads the more accurate you can be. Congradualtion on that one image sjlocke. Denis
« Last Edit: August 12, 2010, 10:40 by cybernesco »

cmcderm1

  • Chad McDermott - Elite Image Photography
« Reply #55 on: August 17, 2010, 16:57 »
0
Whether it's $30K or $100K, I'd effing take half either way.  That's just an insanely great number.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
15 Replies
5528 Views
Last post November 26, 2006, 01:54
by yingyang0
7 Replies
3553 Views
Last post June 09, 2009, 22:26
by rene
59 Replies
13519 Views
Last post March 10, 2011, 15:05
by djpadavona
10 Replies
2965 Views
Last post May 08, 2011, 19:34
by jamirae
84 Replies
15215 Views
Last post October 07, 2011, 07:32
by sam100

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results