Are new files getting better placing now?  I have been holiding off most of my images until they do.

Yes, I think they are, which is why I'm going to resume uploading.

Way to go ... keep up the good work!

...
Incidentally there is a microstock book by Douglas Freer i saw on Amazon. I went to my local Borders bookshop but they did not have a copy so I could not browse through it and was wondering if anyone has this book and is it good? or worth getting?

An ultra-quick Google search shows he's been on DT for three years and has only 2600+ sales. He's been on IS for even longer and has barely managed 10k sales. Unless your aspirations are low, I don't think you will benefit much from his 'insights'.

You need to have much more experience in this industry before writing things like this, jim_h - you're making yourself appear quite foolish.

I'd agree that 'pickpocket' is not a valid keyword.

I'd also like to add that although you have a good concept, I think you've totally blown its execution. It's not immediately obvious that he's looking at a wallet, and his expression is completely off-the-wall for the situation - I can't help but think to myself "Just what the bejeezuz is he looking at?". And he appears to be wearing a suit. Given that the thief is wearing black, white might have been a better background  choice. Or better yet a brick wall, as in 'thief/mugger examines stolen wallet in alley'.

Sorry to be so critical ... just trying to give you a 'leg up' so to speak.

DT isn't a worthwhile agency? They are almost always my #3 earner. If they aren't worthwhile, that means (to me) that only 2 agencies are. Seems a bit odd to me.

You need to read more carefully: I didn't say DT was not a worthwhile agency.
I've edited my orignal post so that nobody else can misinterpret what I wrote.

Wow, what a bunch of uninformed tripe.
He even slags Rinder, whom I'm guessing wanted him to write about this in order to get some exposure for his CD.

That's true on all the sites you mentioned, but did you ever read that magazine? Its in all the bookstores here in the Netherlands', so probably it's sold in the rest of Europe as well.
All those readers are gonna see your work. What do you think it costs to put an ad in that magazine?!

Yes, I have seen that magazine. It's target audience is amateurs who want to improve their Photoshop skills, not designers or photo editors or anyone else who regularly purchases generic stock imagery (e.g. attractive woman on white background), which is why it makes no sense to give them an image to them for free.

If you give your work away you have to be at least partly sure you're getting something of value for it. When I did portrait work I had my imagery used as textbook examples in a popular book on portrait photography, which paid off big-time when it came to wooing clients. I was recently approached for a credit-mention-only cover shot on an obscure industry standard magazine, which I turned down because a placement there will not likely lead to increased business.

Going one step further, I have been approached like the OP has, and I've sometimes been able to negotiate a private RF license of a customized image. Instead of giving them his blessings to license the image from IS as an EL, I think the OP should have offered a private deal at the same price the buyer would have paid IS.

No pay, no play is my opinion.

Yep, that's right.
It is highly unlikely you will get increased business, prestige, or more exposure from this magazine using your image.

I think that more often than not, the photographer is just focused on the specifics on the image (as opposed to the big picture) when he/she objects to a 'too many of these' rejection. An example of this might be a picture of a beach sunset in Bali. Sure, the agency hardly has any 'beach sunset in Bali' shots, but they have a surplus of generic 'beach sunset' shots, which is why the image was rejected. You don't hint at what was in the image, but maybe that's what happened to you, RacePhoto?

In addition to stats not updating, I can't get the stats page to load AT ALL today. 

That's odd, everything seems to be working for me.

FWIW, I've seen a lot of well-known microstock model imagery used in ways that make me cringe, and I'm not by any means a conservative or prude. I always think to myself that if the photographer or model saw it they would not be pleased. Makes me glad I don't shoot models.

As to what can be done about it, I'd think very little. If you don't want your imagery to be used in ways that don't appeal to you, you need to be more proactive by making less generic imagery. If you make an image that can be used for just about anything, it will be used for just about anything, and complaining about someone using it in a way you didn't intend or foresee doesn't make much sense.

I see this in much the same vein as the old 'Doctor it hurts when I do this ...' joke. If you don't like your images to be used like that, don't make images that could ever be used like that. Yes, your revenue will decrease if you take this tack, but so will your problems and stress.

...
Brian, if you are some kind of spokesperson for Veer, please speak plainly.

I spoke with Brian earlier today, and he was very upfront about what was happening. Selected images are going to be automatically added to the Veer RF library, which will soon go live. I didn't note exactly when, but it'll be sooner rather than later - maybe even by the end of this month. I don't feel it's proper to say anything else, so please don't ask me or PM me about it.

He's away on a ski trip until Sunday evening, so don't expect any quick answers to your questions.