This is just an observation, not a complaint, though ... 
(Background: I just had 2 dls, presumably by the same buyer from the same geographic location. One was demoted and I thought it must have bemused them why one pic was so much more expensive than the other. Anyway, out of curiosity, I had a look to see how many pics there are on iS from this location, and there are only 32, and only by three authors: one other exclusive, one indie and myself. NOT ONE of the indie's images show the location named, but the all the files by the other exclusive and myself all feature the location. I just thought I would analyse the best match as there were so few files. I've got to find something to do while there's no point uploading there. 
Here is the result, where A = the other exclusive, B = me and I = the indie. Pos - best match position, Auth = the authors and DLs = the dls showing for the file. * = the files I had dls on today.

Pos  Auth  DLs
1     A      3
2     I      1
3     I      0
4     A      1
5     A      0
6     I      1
7     A      0
8     A      1
9     A      0
10    A      0
11    I      0
12    B      3*
13    A      1
14    A      1
15    B      0
16    I      0
17    I      0
18    A      0
19    A      0
20    A      0
21    A      0
22    A      0
23    B      0
24    I      0
25    A      2
26    A      0
27    B      0
28    B      1
29    B      4
30    B      2
31    B      2
32    B      0*

Observations:
1. It's a low-demand, low supply location, but I'd have expected that.
2. Lobo's assertion that exclusives will "ALWAYS, period" have best match priority seems doubtful looking at the above chart, and bearing in mind that not one of the indie's files is relevant to the location keyword I searched on.
3. They really hate me 

I did not look at when the files were uploaded, though changing to Newest puts most of the indie's files near the top (but newest isn't working properly on other searches, and I didn't go into each file).

I've noticed in my more usual check searches that the best match in general has changed over the past few days to a week - it was becoming obvious in what was selling from my port (old files with low previous sales). I'm happy to get these sales, and it just shows what an effect best match has.

Come on iStock, get something sorted so that it's worth uploading again - that was boring to do, and no doubt to read.

What is the location and what what would be your conclusion based on this tiny sample ?

The location is pretty irrelevant - I've noticed the same pattern on many searches, but this was so small that it was easy actually to quantify. And if I posted it, I'd be in trouble for calling out the poor keyworder.

My conclusions are as noted in the post. The best match is paying no attention to irrelevant keywording, and exclusives who keyword correctly have no advantage in best match over indies who keyword totally wrongly. I've also noticed on some searches that who someone is has a weighting in best match. The best match changed quite a bit some time in the last week, and not exactly the same pattern in my sample searches.

Quote from: ShadySue on February 04, 2014, 09:08

The location is pretty irrelevant

We all see different results. Your results may be completely different to mine. Without the location there is no way of knowing.

PM me!  and I will tell you how and when to upload in order to get a premiere position is their best match!! 

Quote from: ShadySue on February 04, 2014, 09:08

The location is pretty irrelevant

We all see different results. Your results may be completely different to mine. Without the location there is no way of knowing.

I'm aware of that; it's iStock's stated policy, and I have a friend in western USA and we occasionally compare results, though the position differences are usually minor.

I will say that the location is in the CV and in the west of Scotland, not too far where I'm located. 

The thing of main concern to me in this search is the indie whose keyword of this search term is wrong has priority in several cases above two exclusives with correct keywording.

If you really must know, PM me. I'll even link you to a screenshot of my search if you want.

BTW, even if your best match results are totally different, my results give the lie to the "ALWAYS. period" assertion.

What's the relative age of the files Liz?
At the moment. I think all my files must be at the back of the search. Whatever's making the best match tick at present.
It's getting to the point of me thinking what to do, and thinking that you can't get less than nothing!

The indie uploaded his between August and Dec last year, other than his editorials which were apparently uploaded in 1983 (editorial bug since the weekend at least). Mine and the other exclusive's are all older.
Interesting, as my newer (I uploaded only 12 files in Dec, one in Jan, for this reason), properly keyworded, files sink very fast. I can't get interested in making photos specially for iStock, I can even see that one extremely high ranking extremely commercial true-exclusive iStocker has slowed down their upload rate and is selling relatively (to their normal) extremely few recent-ish files.
I see this has been brought up repeatedly in the iS forums, but they can't or won't address it.
Still all these newbie submissions, mostly appallingly keyworded, must make TPTB very happy.