MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: I'm having horible month on SS  (Read 1980 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: August 20, 2019, 04:34 »
+8
SS is pretty much every month my best earner by far. Every August on SS was pretty solid for me.

This month so far SS is barely my 2nd earner, probably 3rd (depending on how is my August on IS).

I guess this month is my turn to get bamboozled by SS's algorithm.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2019, 04:37 by stockman11 »


« Reply #1 on: August 20, 2019, 12:14 »
0
SS is pretty weak for me this month too - Like more than half the days are weekend days poorly. June and December were also particularly bad, but this month is on track to be worse.

Probably my #2 site this month, but that is only because the other sites are mostly doing very poorly too.

I don't know if it is some algorithm shift or just the cumulative effect of how the numbers are going - a similar number of sales for less $ spread among lots and lots of competing images.

« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2019, 02:29 »
0
Can't say August is particularly horrible compared to June or July (although I have slightly more images in my port now), but downloads seem to come in bursts now. Few days very low or nothing, then one day which makes up for the previous ones.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2019, 08:45 »
+3
The following came from a 123RF thread, I thought it was better here. Hopefully Snow and others who have come up with this theory can provide more backing to explain how it works?



I dont get people that continue complaining while they also continue uploading. SS forum is full of those people, really sad to see.
Either you stop uploading, remove your work or quit them. Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. That is why I am removing a few hundred low sellers from SS.

Anyway, I hope this info can be of help to some.

"Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. " WHO?

I'm happy with SS, unlike the people you mention. Can anyone show some evidence that my placement is based on whole portfolio and individual images? Sounds complicated like having a group line up alphabetically according to height?  :o

Which is first, individual images or my portfolio performance? Or maybe if everything is equal for an image, then the individuals portfolio performance will move them up?

My question is this, another new theory on how we are ranked, to add to all the rest, which is interesting, but I'd really like it if the people who introduce these, would show why they believe them and some evidence that their theory is actually true. "Everyone knows" or "It's obvious" are not evidence.

« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2019, 10:34 »
0
I guess it's my turn this month, apart from being overall great I also got a 80$ single, probably my biggest sale on SS ever.
On the other hand, Adobe seems to move like snail this month.

« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2019, 12:46 »
0
The following came from a 123RF thread, I thought it was better here. Hopefully Snow and others who have come up with this theory can provide more backing to explain how it works?



I dont get people that continue complaining while they also continue uploading. SS forum is full of those people, really sad to see.
Either you stop uploading, remove your work or quit them. Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. That is why I am removing a few hundred low sellers from SS.

Anyway, I hope this info can be of help to some.

"Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. " WHO?

I'm happy with SS, unlike the people you mention. Can anyone show some evidence that my placement is based on whole portfolio and individual images? Sounds complicated like having a group line up alphabetically according to height?  :o

Which is first, individual images or my portfolio performance? Or maybe if everything is equal for an image, then the individuals portfolio performance will move them up?

My question is this, another new theory on how we are ranked, to add to all the rest, which is interesting, but I'd really like it if the people who introduce these, would show why they believe them and some evidence that their theory is actually true. "Everyone knows" or "It's obvious" are not evidence.

Not a clue on SS or 123RF but looking back to my very first submissions i think that if i could i would gladly delete them in order to present a much interesting and compact browsable port. No matter if actually this help for better ranking or not.

« Reply #6 on: November 13, 2019, 15:19 »
0
not really horrible the same...depsite uploading and improving uqlaity my revenue is simply a straight line since three years....not up and down the same...i will porbebaly end year between plus or minus 100 dollar compared to last three year. it's like having a fixed salary in practice and for me it's unbbielevabe. never a jump simply always the same level....the sals move towards that point every day iilll it's done.

as is getting better but in the las week despite having earned half the previous one my ranking weekly literally improved significantly...so it's depressing cause probably the sals level in as is slowly decreasing. unfortunately nothing new on the front line.. no matter the work i put on....next month i will stop uploading, at this point i have too many files backwardly awaiting to be uploaded...so i upload all now and then stop 2 6 months to rebuild strategy career...

« Reply #7 on: November 13, 2019, 18:23 »
0
The following came from a 123RF thread, I thought it was better here. Hopefully Snow and others who have come up with this theory can provide more backing to explain how it works?



I dont get people that continue complaining while they also continue uploading. SS forum is full of those people, really sad to see.
Either you stop uploading, remove your work or quit them. Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. That is why I am removing a few hundred low sellers from SS.

Anyway, I hope this info can be of help to some.

"Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. " WHO?

I'm happy with SS, unlike the people you mention. Can anyone show some evidence that my placement is based on whole portfolio and individual images? Sounds complicated like having a group line up alphabetically according to height?  :o

Which is first, individual images or my portfolio performance? Or maybe if everything is equal for an image, then the individuals portfolio performance will move them up?

My question is this, another new theory on how we are ranked, to add to all the rest, which is interesting, but I'd really like it if the people who introduce these, would show why they believe them and some evidence that their theory is actually true. "Everyone knows" or "It's obvious" are not evidence.

right, all too many make these conclusions based at best, on small sample size.

my % of total portfolio that's seen sales is probably low, but I continue to sell both new and 10 yr old images - just not as many nas 4-5 years ago.   but would be silly to generalize from that or to form conspiracy theories

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #8 on: November 14, 2019, 13:10 »
0
The following came from a 123RF thread, I thought it was better here. Hopefully Snow and others who have come up with this theory can provide more backing to explain how it works?



I dont get people that continue complaining while they also continue uploading. SS forum is full of those people, really sad to see.
Either you stop uploading, remove your work or quit them. Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. That is why I am removing a few hundred low sellers from SS.

Anyway, I hope this info can be of help to some.

"Also keep in mind that someone mentioned that your whole portfolio performance has input on search placement, not only individual images. " WHO?

I'm happy with SS, unlike the people you mention. Can anyone show some evidence that my placement is based on whole portfolio and individual images? Sounds complicated like having a group line up alphabetically according to height?  :o

Which is first, individual images or my portfolio performance? Or maybe if everything is equal for an image, then the individuals portfolio performance will move them up?

My question is this, another new theory on how we are ranked, to add to all the rest, which is interesting, but I'd really like it if the people who introduce these, would show why they believe them and some evidence that their theory is actually true. "Everyone knows" or "It's obvious" are not evidence.

right, all too many make these conclusions based at best, on small sample size.

my % of total portfolio that's seen sales is probably low, but I continue to sell both new and 10 yr old images - just not as many nas 4-5 years ago.   but would be silly to generalize from that or to form conspiracy theories

This theory comes and goes, it's not as common as AI or capped earnings, the algorithm must have changed, the search or the agency always treats someone else better...  ;)

I remember when IS reviewers were accused of rejecting images, because they were similar to their own. Or that SS promotes new people, because they get paid less. There should be a list, so they don't have to come up as something new. We can just refer to the list of theories and conspiracies behind the agencies and save some people the trouble of thinking of ways we're being messed with.

I mean, we're voluntarily uploading, getting 15% or 22% or some pitiful number, (aka peanuts) there are factories making images 1000 times faster than any one person can keep up, and yet some are trying to figure out reasons why or how agencies are somehow manipulating sales.

Lets ignore that hard facts, that the competition is an ocean tsunami of new images and we are a trickling little stream off in the woods.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2019, 10:05 »
0
Just wanted to point this out:

Paid downloads were up 5% Y/Y to 46.3M, and revenue per download was flat at $3.40.

The image collection expanded 34% to 297M. The video collection grew 33% to 16M.

From the earnings reports Q3 2019

Paid downloads are up, our individual downloads aren't. RPD is $3.40 while mine, lifetime, is around 72 cents. I suppose I should look at the year, but my guess is, it's lower than 72

If I wanted to keep up with the overall site, I would need to upload 1,500 new images, every three months. And I'm pretty sure that's not actually keeping up with 10 million new images that get accepted every three months.

Low this year was $30.77 high was $50.09 I guess the granny investors are still convinced this is going somewhere? $42.19 today



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
4192 Views
Last post April 04, 2006, 08:25
by CJPhoto
29 Replies
7740 Views
Last post June 13, 2007, 16:45
by madelaide
10 Replies
4269 Views
Last post September 03, 2007, 05:41
by snem
34 Replies
6908 Views
Last post February 01, 2010, 02:22
by FD
14 Replies
3357 Views
Last post May 27, 2017, 19:08
by angelawaye

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results