Average no. of sales per month?

[John Mitchell]

I thought this might be an interesting statistic to explore.

 

Last year (2020), I averaged 13 sales per month, which worked out to roughly 1.7 sales per month per 1000 images on sale.

 

How about you?

[Michael Ventura]

In 2020 I was averaging 16 sales a month with 8,490 images...but this year I am averaging 20 per month...no real increase in gross money per month earned

 

I guess that means about 1.8 sales per month per 1000 in 2020 and so far in 2021 it is about 2.3 per month per 1000.

Edited April 16, 2021 by Michael Ventura

[IanDavidson]

Last year, as a very rough average, I had 1.56 sales per month per 1,000 images

[Steve F]

Last year 5.75 pictures per month with ca. 2700 images, so 2.13 per month per 1,000 images.

[gvallee]

Last year, I averaged 17 sales a month with roughly 22,000 images. 

So far this year, it looks like the average is 18 per month.

[John Mitchell]

18 hours ago, Steve F said:

Last year 5.75 pictures per month with ca. 2700 images, so 2.13 per month per 1,000 images.

 

That's a pretty good average by the looks of it, given your relatively small collection.

 

I often wonder if after a certain point, uploading a lot of new images actually becomes counter-productive. I'm sure that I could safely delete at least 25% of my collection and still make the same number of sales, perhaps even more, who knows.

[Normspics]

Hi John,  last year averaged 5.25 sales per month, this year so far 5.71 sales pm maybe an increase because I had a push to upload more at the end of last year and the first few months of this year....here’s hoping.

[Reimar]

My portfolio is under-performing by comparison:  Average 13/mo for 1.1/mo//1000.

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by Reimar

[John Morrison]

1 hour ago, John Mitchell said:

I'm sure that I could safely delete at least 25% of my collection and still make the same number of sales

Ah... but which 25%?? 😎

[geogphotos]

I don't see the value of this ratio or why it would be used to judge 'performance'.

 

Within one's own personal parameters, and not in comparison with anybody else, I've always thought that the more images of potentially saleable quality that you have on sale the more sales that you are likely to get.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[John Mitchell]

31 minutes ago, John Morrison said:

Ah... but which 25%?? 😎

 

Ah, but therein lies the rub.

[geogphotos]

13 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

Ah, but therein lies the rub.

 

So why worry? And how would you benefit?

Edited April 16, 2021 by geogphotos

[John Mitchell]

1 minute ago, geogphotos said:

I don't see the value of this ratio or why it would be used to judge 'performance'.

 

Within one's own personal parameters, and not in comparison with anybody else, I've always thought that the more images of potentially saleable quality that you have on sale the more sales that you are likely to get.

 

 

Yes, there are all kinds of ways to judge individual performance. With your large collection, this ratio probably doesn't mean much. However, for those of us who may not reach a small fraction of your total number of images in this lifetime (or perhaps even the next), it might be more significant. It is interesting that most people with smaller collections seem to be reporting 1-2 sales pm per 1000 images, which has always been the general rule of thumb with stock agencies, even during film days if I remember correctly. At this point, do your sales numbers rise proportionately as you add more images?

 

 

[John Mitchell]

1 minute ago, geogphotos said:

 

So why worry? And how would you benefit?

 

What, me worry? I'm just curious (and a bit bored these days).

[geogphotos]

13 minutes ago, John Mitchell said:

 

What, me worry? I'm just curious (and a bit bored these days).

 

 

Okay 'worry' was the wrong word. But I don't think that there is much to be curious about either. The ratio will clearly depend on the content and the tightness of editing. 

 

Maybe getting a lower 'per 1000' ratio would be a better strategy if it meant more thousands on sale to get sales from.

 

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by geogphotos

[Chuck Nacke]

Been averaging between 5 and 10 per month for several years, last year (2020) the average was 8 licenses per month.

 

I have said for a long time that it is not about the number of images that you have available, but the images you have

up, but what I saw in 2020 and am seeing in 2021 it in my opinion " is it is becoming more about the number of images."

 

Also fees are way too low.  I am not blaming Alamy for the low fees,  I think a lot of the higher end markets have disappeared.

I also think that what we are seeing are licenses for the "low hanging fruit" or the quick snapshots for web use.

 

Chuck

[John Richmond]

30.5 sales per month for last year (similar this year so far), giving a monthly ratio of about 4.3 - 4.4 sales per 1000.  However, the average gross was only $18.67 per sale so no fortune was made.

[Steve F]

2 hours ago, John Mitchell said:

 

That's a pretty good average by the looks of it, given your relatively small collection.

 

I often wonder if after a certain point, uploading a lot of new images actually becomes counter-productive. I'm sure that I could safely delete at least 25% of my collection and still make the same number of sales, perhaps even more, who knows.

 

Thanks. I am getting pretty picky these days about what I upload, which has the advantage of keeping my collection tight. But as Ian and Chuck point out, this is not necessarily an advantage as it keeps my collection smaller, so I'm missing out on sales by having a smaller collection. Agreed on being able to delete at least 25% of my collection and not affecting sales, but as others have pointed out, which to delete?? I've had some photos sell that I don't think are particularly good.

 

I think I'm a bit more picky these days though because I don't want to go to the effort of uploading pictures I don't think will sell. Anyway, it's the home shots that outsell all the holiday shots and walking around Basingstoke shots. So lockdown hasn't been terrible for my shooting, just really boring!!

[Steve F]

2 minutes ago, John Richmond said:

30.5 sales per month for last year (similar this year so far), giving a monthly ratio of about 4.3 - 4.4 sales per 1000.  However, the average gross was only $18.67 per sale so no fortune was made.

 

Damn, flowers sell!! Or maybe just picking a subject and specialising.....

[John Richmond]

19 minutes ago, Steve F said:

 

Damn, flowers sell!! Or maybe just picking a subject and specialising.....

I tend to think it's the latter; picking a subject and specialising.  I do pick up a few macro nature shots, landscape and general shots but, yes, it's mostly botanical or horticultural shots that sell for me.

[geogphotos]

21 minutes ago, Steve F said:

 

Damn, flowers sell!! Or maybe just picking a subject and specialising.....

 

It's all about horses for courses.

 

Find a strategy that works for you rather than work to a strategy that somebody told you works for them.

[Steve F]

4 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

It's all about horses for courses.

 

Find a strategy that works for you rather than work to a strategy that somebody told you works for them.

 

Agreed. I'm not sure I have the patience for so many flower shots, and other people would get bored doing all my home shots.

[John Richmond]

2 minutes ago, Steve F said:

 

Agreed. I'm not sure I have the patience for so many flower shots, and other people would get bored doing all my home shots.

I'm a keen gardener as well as an ecologist by original training.  It's something I thoroughly enjoy - well, apart from the getting into ridiculous positions to get the best shot.  Thank goodness for fully articulating screens and live view shooting.

[John Mitchell]

2 hours ago, Steve F said:

 

Thanks. I am getting pretty picky these days about what I upload, which has the advantage of keeping my collection tight. But as Ian and Chuck point out, this is not necessarily an advantage as it keeps my collection smaller, so I'm missing out on sales by having a smaller collection. Agreed on being able to delete at least 25% of my collection and not affecting sales, but as others have pointed out, which to delete?? I've had some photos sell that I don't think are particularly good.

 

I think I'm a bit more picky these days though because I don't want to go to the effort of uploading pictures I don't think will sell. Anyway, it's the home shots that outsell all the holiday shots and walking around Basingstoke shots. So lockdown hasn't been terrible for my shooting, just really boring!!

 

Theoretically, the more images you have in your collection, the smaller the odds that a single image image will license. If you have 3000 images, then the mathematical odds are 1 in 3000; but if you have 30,000 images, they are 1 in 30K. Of course there are many other factors at work, such as demand, image quality, timing, supply, luck, etc. Still, I find this stuff fascinating. It seems that as one's collection gets larger, all the factors start getting mixed up in mysterious ways, and the whole system becomes unstable. At some point entropy and eventually chaos (so-called, anyway) must set in. Perhaps quantum physics has an answer to all this? 🐱

 

Edited April 16, 2021 by John Mitchell

[Marianne]

Last year was my worst year here ever.  This year I am also underperforming with just 1 sale per 1,000 but average price despite a $ sale this month is $129. As sales hopefully pick up I know that average will drop, but before last year I averaged over 2 sales per month per 1,000. Ultimately it is how much you net, not the ratio, though it is helpful to compare how your collection is doing year over year.