Author Topic: rejections vs earnings (Read 2659 times)

dk · « **on:** June 19, 2009, 17:07 »

Maybe we could have a poll to see what is our rejection rate vs earnings at each site.

If for example from a port of 500 images SS accepted 300 and FT 150 images, you probably made more money at SS last year.

If we all voted and if something like this is easy to setup i think we would have some interesting results and i think it would bring the rejection rate down on some snobby sites!

fotografer · « **Reply #1 on:** June 20, 2009, 01:50 »

My order is almost exactly that the sites that have the highest rejection rate for me also have the highest sales. The sites where I have about 99% approval sell very few images wheras the places where I have only 80% sell much more.
I think that stiff rejections make a better collection and stop the buyers from having to wade through lots of bad images.
As far as I'm concerned they should be making approval more difficult not easier.

leaf · « **Reply #2 on:** June 20, 2009, 03:38 »

I think this stems more from the fact that the established sites with tons of images already and good sales don't really need that many more images and are getting picky.

New sites are desperate for both sales and images and take anything they can get.

willie · « **Reply #3 on:** June 20, 2009, 07:14 »

Quote from: leaf on June 20, 2009, 03:38

I think this stems more from the fact that the established sites with tons of images already and good sales don't really need that many more images and are getting picky.

New sites are desperate for both sales and images and take anything they can get.

You think absolutely correct Tyler. In my case exactly true. My approval rate is almost directly converse to my sales. The site where I have the highest rejection ie Fotolia, sells the most or more quickly the images they approve. Initially this was quite unpleasant for me (the higher rejection percentage than the other Big 5), but once I realised that Fotolia sells what they do approve, I stop looking at my rejections there as a bad thing. Similarly, after a year with 100% approval at the "easy" sites and 100% no sales,
I don't bother anymore uploading to such sites. I am not into the business to have my portfolio "seen", I am in the business to have my portfolio earn money.

dk · « **Reply #4 on:** June 20, 2009, 08:44 »

What i'm saying might apply better to the big-6. I understand that new sites or low earners accept more but are unable to sell as much in volume as the established sites. Let's not take any of that into consideration, it doesn't matter how much they sell, at what price, subscription etc. If from a port of 500 you got 30% accepted at FT, 50% at IS, 60% at DT or SS it would be interesting to see how much it affects sales for this specific port. Each site was given the same amount of images, what they accept or reject, how they sell, market and price the images is not to be taken into consideration.

Example (port of 500 new images submitted last year to these agencies)
FT - Accepted 150 - Profit in the period of the next year: 150$
123RF - Accepted 300 - Profit in the period of the next year: 150$
DT - Accepted 300 - Profit in the period of the next year: 250$