Nice to see your rush of enthusiasm Tina.  Yes, it's amazing what can happen at SS.

I joined SS only about a month ago at the strong suggestion of Tom from this forum.  I've managed to upload about 150 images with only 7 rejections, so all the worries about quality, noise etc simply aren't there (well not for me anyway).

Even more remarkable is that in my first month I have had 734 sales.  Yes, I know that sounds ridiculous and I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it with my own eyes.

Someone on the SS forums made the comment 'SS is the only place where a contributor can get an immediate sense of success'.  A good and valid comment I think.

Good luck and keep uploading to SS regularly.

Thanks for the info everyone.

Kosmik - your 80 downloads producing 100th rank is interesting.

I know that over at IS the top ranked people sell somewhere between 500 and 2000 images per week.

So that makes an interesting comparison between the two agencies.

Nonetheless, if FT can sell 80 images a week from your portfolio, that's 400 a month and shouldn't be sneezed at.

Well done Tina!

Good image.  Nice idea.  Can't see a mistake.....

Well done FreezingP.

Anyone heard any further news about Corbis?

I use Adobe Bridge and I've never had a problem with ITPC data at any of the sites.

Percentages don't work properly on calculations like this.  I look at it this way:

The increase for subscribers is $40.  If every subscriber downloads the maximum of 750 per month the 'income' to SS is (750 x 25c = 5.3c per image).  So on this basis SS could increase commission payments by 5c and retain a small operating profit increase of 0.3c per image.

However, the bet SS is making is that most subscribers won't achieve their maximum download limit.  Let's assume that the average subscriber downloads only half the maximum ie 375 images per month.  Then the 'income' to SS has increased by 10.6c per image.  On this basis SS could easily afford 5c extra per image or even 8c extra taking the download payment to 33c and still retain increased operating profits.

Of course SS as a start up business will have planned to book operating losses in the early years with profits to come later.  It may have already reached the 'need profits' stage.

But it seems that a 5c increase is affordable, with 8c a possibility if SS wants to send an important message.  It all depends on the subscriber usage numbers which of course only SS knows.

I am seeing lots of comments from some of the old hands at IS that they are experiencing a disappointing trend in sales.

At the same time the approvals list has dropped significantly from a peak of 30,000 to a current level of 17,000 (the lowest I have seen in months).

All of this is happening at a time when SS and DT seem to be accellerating (DT approvals list still 40,000).

Is this just a temporary thing or a sign of something else?  Anyone have a view?

Congrats.

Yes, interesting articles.  Thanks for posting.

Interested that FT sold 4 million images last year.  That's very low considering the headline image numbers.  Also, as they only employ 18 people and all but three work from home, this explains why they don't get the sales volume; sales need investment in marketing and promotion etc etc.  They don't appear to be doing much of that.

The Shutterstock guy makes the most sense.  Interesting that he's identified a 'middle ground' for mid priced images.  Perhaps a development to come.

CJP, EVERYTHING is charged at twice the price in the UK!

Last September I emigrated here to Australia.  We pay the equivalent of 40p for petrol.  And people here complain about the prices!  When I tell local people what I used to pay in England they are speechless.

In January the Sydney Morning Herald ran a front page piece warning Australians who might be planning a trip to England to be aware of the high prices; the article was prompted by the massive increase in tube fares making a one station stop in Zone 1 �4 if I recall correctly.  A 33% increase.

I can eat out at a great restaurant almost anywhere for �40; in Australia, France, Italy, Hong Kong; yet in London that same meal will cost �120.

London is now officially the most expensive City in the world for almost everything, with public transport right at the top of the list and almost laughably more expensive than anywhere else.

In my last few years in the UK I found I was buying more and more things on the internet primarily from Europe where prices are often half of those locally in England.  Ha, even medicines are a joke; I occasionally use a Ventolin Inhaler; in England I would get one at a so-called prescription discount at �7, but years ago I found I could walk into any pharmacy in France and buy the same thing over the counter for �3.

To be fair to product retailers, they have to charge much higher prices to try to recoup the high transportation, storage, distribution and wage costs.

Good luck with your search!