Promoted beyond my competence!

[Bryan]

I've had a good run of zooms of late, although very few exclusives, and my CTR is way above my normal mediocre position. So yesterday I had 899 views, but only 3 zooms ( all shared, one with a mere 23 others) and my CTR for the day plummeted to 0.34.  I guess that system acts like a governor on an engine, if you get to run too fast it pulls the plug and you slow right down!

[John Morrison]

Huh?

[Betty LaRue]

applies to luck, also.

[John Mitchell]

Could be, guv.

 

Hopefully it doesn't apply to income as well. 🤧

[Betty LaRue]

1 hour ago, John Mitchell said:

Could be, guv.

 

Hopefully it doesn't apply to income as well. 🤧

John, do you have a nasty cold? That’s the 2nd hanky (nose wipe) I’ve seen from you....hope not. I haaate head colds!!

[John Mitchell]

9 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

John, do you have a nasty cold? That’s the 2nd hanky (nose wipe) I’ve seen from you....hope not. I haaate head colds!!

 

No, I thought I was wiping away tears of joy.

 

But thanks for the concern...

 

 

[Bill Brooks]

Forget CTR the most important measure is V/S. That is Views divided by sales. How many views do you have to have, to make a sale?

 

If the figure is low then your images are great, and your keywording is also great. If the figure is high then you are wasting the clients time as well as your own.

 

So take the number of views for a year, and divide by the number of sales in that year. What is your V/S 200? 400? 800? 10,000?

 

V/S may be the secret sauce in the Alamy calculation. It should be anyway.

[wiskerke]

2 hours ago, Bill Brooks said:

Forget CTR the most important measure is V/S. That is Views divided by sales. How many views do you have to have, to make a sale?

 

If the figure is low then your images are great, and your keywording is also great. If the figure is high then you are wasting the clients time as well as your own.

 

So take the number of views for a year, and divide by the number of sales in that year. What is your V/S 200? 400? 800? 10,000?

 

V/S may be the secret sauce in the Alamy calculation. It should be anyway.

 

It should.

 

wim

[Betty LaRue]

4 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

No, I thought I was wiping away tears of joy.

 

But thanks for the concern...

 

 

😊

[John Richmond]

18 hours ago, Bill Brooks said:

Forget CTR the most important measure is V/S. That is Views divided by sales. How many views do you have to have, to make a sale?

 

If the figure is low then your images are great, and your keywording is also great. If the figure is high then you are wasting the clients time as well as your own.

 

So take the number of views for a year, and divide by the number of sales in that year. What is your V/S 200? 400? 800? 10,000?

 

V/S may be the secret sauce in the Alamy calculation. It should be anyway.

 

Hadn't thought of using that as a metric but it does make sense.  For what it's worth mine is 241 for this year but I've no idea how that ranks..

Edited November 1, 2019 by John Richmond
typo

[John Mitchell]

54 minutes ago, John Richmond said:

 

Hadn't thought of using that as a metric but it does make sense.  For what it's worth mine is 241 for this year but I've no idea how that ranks..

 

Hmmm.. my views to sales ratio for 2019 (Jan.1 to Oct. 31) appears to be 477 (72072/151), which doesn't sound so hot.

 

However sales and revenue are already both up substantially from 2018's totals.

Edited November 1, 2019 by John Mitchell

[M.Chapman]

19 hours ago, Bill Brooks said:

So take the number of views for a year, and divide by the number of sales in that year. What is your V/S 200? 400? 800? 10,000?

 

Over the last 12 months I had 47,530 views and 64 sales giving a ratio of 743 views/sale, which I imagine is not particularly  good.

 

NB. I had to manually exclude some refunded sales which My Alamy Measures was still counting as sales.

 

Anyone else care to share their numbers? 

 

Given that Alamy is running a business where it costs to host every image and revenue is more important than unit sales, I'd argue that an even more sensible measure, from Alamy's perspective, would be to take the annual sales revenue divided by the number of image in a contributor's portfolio. Although the lag between uploading images and sales occurring would make it hard for new contributors to get a good rank. But then that applies to views/sale too.  

 

Mark

 

Edited November 1, 2019 by M.Chapman

[M.Chapman]

22 hours ago, Bryan said:

I've had a good run of zooms of late, although very few exclusives, and my CTR is way above my normal mediocre position. So yesterday I had 899 views, but only 3 zooms ( all shared, one with a mere 23 others) and my CTR for the day plummeted to 0.34.  I guess that system acts like a governor on an engine, if you get to run too fast it pulls the plug and you slow right down!

 

In the days when Alamy used to do regular reranks I found my performance oscillated with a roughly 6 month period (reranks nominally every 180 days). If my rank rose then I received more views (as a result of less specific matches appearing higher in search results) but without a corresponding increase in zooms. So my CTR suffered. Then, when the next re-rank happened, my rank would drop back again and views would fall back too.

 

Mark

Edited November 1, 2019 by M.Chapman

[hdh]

My ratio is about 1300, so not so good from the interpretation above

My average CTR is slightly above average with .58. 

On some new pictures I uploaded, I checked where they appear in results;

Flabbergastingly one picture appeared on the first page of a total of six. 

I guess alamy ranking is some black art that we will never get deep insight into. 

Another indicatior that I would be interested in, is how many lightboxes a picture is in.

That factor lies somewhere between V/S and CTR, showing if a picture has made a potential shortlist.  

Edited November 1, 2019 by hdh

[Brizbee]

Thought I'd have a go at this and was pleasantly surprised by the result.

 

Views (1/1 - 31/10)  = 3474

Sales (1/1 - 31/10) = 12

 

So 3474/12 = 289

 

How this compares to the big guns here who get a lot of sales I have no idea but i'm quite happy with that figure. I must be doing something right!

[Bryan]

12 hours ago, M.Chapman said:

 

In the days when Alamy used to do regular reranks I found my performance oscillated with a roughly 6 month period (reranks nominally every 180 days). If my rank rose then I received more views (as a result of less specific matches appearing higher in search results) but without a corresponding increase in zooms. So my CTR suffered. Then, when the next re-rank happened, my rank would drop back again and views would fall back too.

 

Mark

 

Thanks Mark, that's the point I was trying to make, and I feel that it still applies. 

[M.Chapman]

1 hour ago, Bryan said:

 

Thanks Mark, that's the point I was trying to make, and I feel that it still applies. 

 

But in principle the oscillation I mention only occurs if re-ranks are occurring. I've seen no evidence of a re-rank for well over a year (possibly 2?).  You seem to be reporting a much shorter term effect, which I imagine could simply be down to normal statistical variation? The oscillation I see is on my rolling 12 month average of my views. I used a 12 month rolling average to remove seasonal effects. Every time a rerank occurs that shifts my position, the views start trending towards a new level, and they tend to go up after one rerank and then down after the next. I also saw similar up and down movement in my BHZ position. If t moved up after one rerank, it moved down after the next. 

 

Mark

[Allan Bell]

Working on the maths given above.

 

One years worth of figures from 30/11/18 to 1/11/19      Views = 9351  Sales = 11   Zooms = 36

 

Therefore V/S = 850    Also  V/Z = 259  and  Z/S = 3.27

 

From the above figures.

1  V/S is really poor.

2 V/Z looks better on paper.

3 Z/S is I believe about the ratio of sales to zooms that is expected.

 

As I only have around 4800 image on Alamy, and I am going from comments made in the past, you used to expect one sale/month with 3000 images up. But that is a long time ago and as there are many more images on Alamy now and with my relatively low count I don't think my sales are too bad. I would expect that had I managed to keep pace with uploading new images I would have had around 17,000 to 18,000 images on Alamy by now with pro rata views, zooms & sales. I can only put it down to two or three bad years of poor uploading due to circumstances outside of my control.

 

Allan

 

[John Walker]

On 31/10/2019 at 22:15, Bill Brooks said:

Forget CTR the most important measure is V/S. That is Views divided by sales. How many views do you have to have, to make a sale?

 

If the figure is low then your images are great, and your keywording is also great. If the figure is high then you are wasting the clients time as well as your own.

 

So take the number of views for a year, and divide by the number of sales in that year. What is your V/S 200? 400? 800? 10,000?

 

V/S may be the secret sauce in the Alamy calculation. It should be anyway.

 

Mine works out at 420.  Is that good or bad?

 

John

[spacecadet]

860.

[Bionic]

Views to sales is 729 but I dont think I've been contributing for long enough for that to be particularly meaningful. Average CTR is 0.51which seems to be steadily climbing at the moment so approximately 6 months in to actively contributing I'm reasonably happy with things as they stand 😀 

[BobD]

Mine averages around 400 over the last 3 years.

[DJ Myford]

For the rolling year my V/S = 252. The figure for 2019 will probably be about the same unless I get a sale or refund in the last two months.

[wiskerke]

V/S = 276 for the rolling year across all pseudos.

It has been at its lowest in 2017 at 244.

Creeping up since.

However one pseudo was at 1136 and another at 37 for the rolling year on October 1st.

 

wim

[Ed Rooney]

My V-S number for the past 3 months is a very low 197 . . . but my number for the past year is a much higher 589. I guess 589 is nothing to celebrate? 

 

Looking around here and there just now, I happened on the search term "adverts" (advert). Very British. I'm going to add it to appropriate image tags.