Quote from: tickstock on August 09, 2013, 18:54

A few years ago the average exclusive was making $30,000 per year (or $2500/month) so lots of exclusives now have their income under represented in the poll.

Where do you get that figure and how are you working it out?

When iStockStats was working (preRCs), for a long time I was always around position 1880-5 in downloads. That was among all contributors, not just exclusives, and at that time there were said to be IIRC something around 4000-5000 exclusives. So I'd say that put me a bit above the average for exclusives for downloads. The top people would be earning much more, but some of the top downloaded togs were indies, just like now.
I can assure you that as an apparent 'average' exclusive at the time, I was earning quite a bit less than half of that.

So, where are you getting the 'average exclusive was earning $2500pm' figure from? No doubt a very few at the top were earning more than that, but I doubt very much if even the 'average earned by exclusives' was anything like that.

From the yearly poll here, should be about the same people answering the monthly poll so I chose that group.   I meant it to be the average of people that participate on MSG, all the numbers would be much lower if you took into account people that uploaded 1 image in 2005 and never thought about it again.  Your numbers would be for the median contributor not the average.

\

\

Quote from: Mantis on August 08, 2013, 07:47

Quote from: sharpshot on August 08, 2013, 02:47

Quote from: Albert Martin on August 08, 2013, 02:16

Well, Good Luck Yuri!

As you all can see the right side here under 'microstock poll results' it is more than clear that being iStock exclusive gives you more earnings than compared to all other places combined together.  It clearly states 335.3 if you are exclusive. So, Yuri knows his math. It is obviously more easier to go with one agency than spreading your portfolio through all of them.

Nevertheless, mobile phone photo selling platforms are risk. Who dares wins - so Yuri I wish you luck in your business venture.

I, amongst the rest will stay with lower earning majority of this industry and avoid to become part of Getty/iStock machinery. At least we need to have some opposition to them - So I am there!

I don't think its clear at all that istock exclusives make more than non-exclusives.  Yuri obviously thought being non-exclusive was more lucrative up until his meeting with Getty.  None of us know how much they offered him to go exclusive.  I don't think he did it just on the maths and he has obviously done a deal, as he is the only exclusive to still have tens of thousands of images on several istock rival sites.

I'm sure exclusivity will suit some people but I think the best time to do it was a few years ago and now is probably the worst time.

I also think that the majority of Istock exclusives at MSG are high enders and (here by in large to speak on behalf of IS) skew the results.  I would venture to guess that most GAP's (generally accepted photographers) exclusives just upload and don't actively participate in forum discussions.  I see by in large that MSG in general has a wide breadth of contributors, from beginners to experienced, most of whom are not exclusive to IS. This is to say that I personally believe that the numbers in the polls are more accurate for non-exclusives than for exclusives simply because of the breadth of responders and number of data points. Just my opinion, of course.

Yup. I reckon that the IS exclusive figure could be quite skewed too by small numbers of  large volume accounts.

It can't be skewed too much the max you can enter is only $2500.  A few years ago the average exclusive was making $30,000 per year (or $2500/month) so lots of exclusives now have their income under represented in the poll. 

\

\

\

\

\

\

\

]