The “evolution” of sales at Alamy - Round 2

[Rubens Alarcon]

Hello everybody!

 

I thought it would be helpful to publish an update of this previous post:

https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/16422-the-%E2%80%9Cevolution%E2%80%9D-of-sales-at-alamy/#comment-333442

 

Updated with 2023 sales results reported by users of this forum. Adjusted averages to reflect only forum members that reported sales AND revenue.

- All numbers are based on GROSS sales and averages for the whole group.

- An average of 47 contributors per month reported monthly sales from 2018-2023. The highest was in 2019, with 51 contributors, the lowest was in 2023, with 43.

 

Average sale price per image:

2018 = $35.89

2019 = $30.60

2020 = $29.14

2021 = $25.76

2022 = $20.67

2023 = $22.90

 

The good news is that there was a 10.8% average price increase in 2023 compared to 2022. The bad news is that it was not enough to offset the decreases from previous years.

 

Average number of images needed to generate 1 sale (avg images in the portfolio divided by avg # of sales) – all reporting contributors:

2018 = 645

2019 = 655

2020 = 780

2021 = 743

2022 = 708

2023 = 783

 

If you search the forum, it appears that there is a consensus that you need 1,000 images to generate a sale. This has not been true for a while, but it might be soon...

 

From 2020 to 2022 there was a decrease in the number of images needed to generate sales, but this trend was reversed in 2023. We are now back to the 2020 average. This increase in the number of images needed (10.6%) offsets the price gain of 10.8% indicated above.

 

Our “income” is based on how many images we have in our portfolios, how many sales we can generate from those and the price we can get for each image.

 

Here are some metrics:

If your averages are higher than the ones indicated above, congratulations, you are doing well! But...

 

If your current average gross price per image is lower than $22.90, these are possible reasons, among others:

1)    Your images are too similar to other images widely available in the market or being offered in MS sites for lower prices;

2)    Your images are more suitable for web use and are not attracting higher paying buyers;

3)    You have opted in for novel use in the additional revenue options, resulting in lower prices.

 

If you need more than 783 images on average to generate a sale, these are possible reasons, among others:

1)    Your images are not as appealing as similar images from fellow photographers;

2)    Your images are not being found by the buyers due to irrelevant keywords, keyword spamming or lack of keywords;

3)    Your portfolio has a high number of similar images or is limited in subject scope;

4)    Your images are off trend/not in demand.

 

Let’s assume we, as a group, had an average of 100 images for sale in 2018. Based on the numbers above, here is how many images we would need in the subsequent years to generate the same income as in 2018.

 

2018 = 100

2019 = 119

2020 = 149

2021 = 160

2022 = 190

2023 = 190

 

The upward trend of needing more images to generate the same gross revenue came to a halt last year due to the higher average price per image. However, we still need almost twice (+90%) as many images to generate the same income as 2018.

 

Good luck to all in 2024!

[Jeffrey Isaac Greenberg]

Thanks for posting.  Very interesting.  Very impressive.

my own average $$gross per license recent years:

 

$45.37 (2019)

$41.06 (2020)

$43.45 (2021)

$35.00 (2022)

$33.40 (2023)

 

I may have issue with data involving one's collection count..?

a. delayed reporting 3+ months means true collection count was often lower

b. images going live today aren't even seen first time for days-weeks-months,

compound that with (a) -- IMO, one's collection count ~month earlier more realistic...?

(if one isn't growing one's collection, it don't matter)

[John a N]

thanks for that post! When you say total image count for a sale, is that a sale per year or per month you mean?

[spacecadet]

Those figures are quite familiar to me except for the images per licence. Mine is far lower, about 140, up fron 105 in 2018. Something under 1% of images licence each year.

[Steve F]

Great post Rubens, thank you!

[Steve F]

6 hours ago, spacecadet said:

Those figures are quite familiar to me except for the images per licence.

 

I think he was quoting images per license per month? So I would be 5000 images / (238 sales /12 months) = 252 images needed per license per month.

Edited March 8 by Steve F

[Steve F]

9 hours ago, Rubens Alarcon said:

If your current average gross price per image is lower than $22.90, these are possible reasons, among others:

1)    Your images are too similar to other images widely available in the market or being offered in MS sites for lower prices;

2)    Your images are more suitable for web use and are not attracting higher paying buyers;

3)    You have opted in for novel use in the additional revenue options, resulting in lower prices.

 

1) Yes

2) Yes

3) Quit when the contract said novel use included AI training.

[Mr Standfast]

Thank you Rubens. Thats a lot of work for the benefit of us all.

Nice portfolio.

[Normspics]

Very interesting thank you Rubens!

[M.Chapman]

Interesting. I wonder how much of the slight increase in revenue/image in 2023 is being driven by Alamy's infringement team? In my case I think infringement revenue has been a major factor. Indeed, if it wasn't for infringement fees, my gross revenue per image would have continued to decrease.

 

Mark

[Alexander Hogg]

14 hours ago, Rubens Alarcon said:

1)    Your images are too similar to other images widely available in the market or being offered in MS sites for lower prices;

2)    Your images are more suitable for web use and are not attracting higher paying buyers;

3)    You have opted in for novel use in the additional revenue options, resulting in lower prices.

 

If you need more than 783 images on average to generate a sale, these are possible reasons, among others:

1)    Your images are not as appealing as similar images from fellow photographers;

2)    Your images are not being found by the buyers due to irrelevant keywords, keyword spamming or lack of keywords;

3)    Your portfolio has a high number of similar images or is limited in subject scope;

4)    Your images are off trend/not in demand.

 

1) Yes

2) Yes

3) No

Mostly agree on all 4

Time to get different images on the port 

Inexperience is also a factor 

[Rubens Alarcon]

5 hours ago, Mr Standfast said:

Thank you Rubens. Thats a lot of work for the benefit of us all.

Nice portfolio.

Thank you.

[Rubens Alarcon]

7 hours ago, John a N said:

thanks for that post! When you say total image count for a sale, is that a sale per year or per month you mean?

It is the average per month for all contributors that posted in the forum. The monthly average varies quite a bit. The highest was in October with 941, and the lowest in June, with 662.

[Rubens Alarcon]

6 hours ago, Steve F said:

 

I think he was quoting images per license per month? So I would be 5000 images / (238 sales /12 months) = 252 images needed per license per month.

👍

[Rubens Alarcon]

14 hours ago, Jeffrey Isaac Greenberg said:

Thanks for posting.  Very interesting.  Very impressive.

my own average $$gross per license recent years:

 

$45.37 (2019)

$41.06 (2020)

$43.45 (2021)

$35.00 (2022)

$33.40 (2023)

 

I may have issue with data involving one's collection count..?

a. delayed reporting 3+ months means true collection count was often lower

b. images going live today aren't even seen first time for days-weeks-months,

compound that with (a) -- IMO, one's collection count ~month earlier more realistic...?

(if one isn't growing one's collection, it don't matter)

It is great that you are above the $ average.🙌 I use the actual number of images on sale shown at each contributor's profile at the time of the posting, so it will change every month as new images are added to the portfolio. Please keep in mind that my numbers are just an indication of what is happening because not everybody reports every month and the sample is very small.

[wiskerke]

Great survey! Thank you!

 

wim

[geogphotos]

My observations of the monthly sales thread is that some people post every month or nearly every month, some when they have especially good sales, some when they have especially bad sales.  The majority have very few sales. A lot of people always hide their actual sales data and just post generalities. Overall, It has always suggested to me that there is an inbuilt ego bias. 

 

Personally, I don't much care about the mean or about the number of images per sale/per month ( mine is more like 1:2000 per month).  Money in the bank is all that really matters. 

 

A few other factors that could affect these stats:

 

exclusive or not

North American sales or not

RF or RM

 

Im 

 

 

Edited March 8 by geogphotos

[M.Chapman]

2 hours ago, geogphotos said:

A few other factors that could affect these stats:

 

exclusive or not

North American sales or not

RF or RM

+ infringement revenue included or not

 

Mark

[John Richmond]

Many thanks for putting together those stats.  I now know my place - below average gross return per sale and at ~200 well below the 783 needed in a portfolio on average to generate a sale.  So, in demand but poorly paid - sounds like my entire working life!

[Rubens Alarcon]

1 hour ago, M.Chapman said:

+ infringement revenue included or not

 

Mark

No infringement revenue added to these numbers.

[Rubens Alarcon]

1 hour ago, John Richmond said:

Many thanks for putting together those stats.  I now know my place - below average gross return per sale and at ~200 well below the 783 needed in a portfolio on average to generate a sale.  So, in demand but poorly paid - sounds like my entire working life!

You are welcome. Things are not so bad, John. Only 16% of all contributors that reported sales in 2023 did better than you when you combine both metrics.🤑

[Chuck Nacke]

22 hours ago, Rubens Alarcon said:

Hello everybody!

 

I thought it would be helpful to publish an update of this previous post:

https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/16422-the-%E2%80%9Cevolution%E2%80%9D-of-sales-at-alamy/#comment-333442

 

Updated with 2023 sales results reported by users of this forum. Adjusted averages to reflect only forum members that reported sales AND revenue.

- All numbers are based on GROSS sales and averages for the whole group.

- An average of 47 contributors per month reported monthly sales from 2018-2023. The highest was in 2019, with 51 contributors, the lowest was in 2023, with 43.

 

Average sale price per image:

2018 = $35.89

2019 = $30.60

2020 = $29.14

2021 = $25.76

2022 = $20.67

2023 = $22.90

 

The good news is that there was a 10.8% average price increase in 2023 compared to 2022. The bad news is that it was not enough to offset the decreases from previous years.

 

Average number of images needed to generate 1 sale (avg images in the portfolio divided by avg # of sales) – all reporting contributors:

2018 = 645

2019 = 655

2020 = 780

2021 = 743

2022 = 708

2023 = 783

 

If you search the forum, it appears that there is a consensus that you need 1,000 images to generate a sale. This has not been true for a while, but it might be soon...

 

From 2020 to 2022 there was a decrease in the number of images needed to generate sales, but this trend was reversed in 2023. We are now back to the 2020 average. This increase in the number of images needed (10.6%) offsets the price gain of 10.8% indicated above.

 

Our “income” is based on how many images we have in our portfolios, how many sales we can generate from those and the price we can get for each image.

 

Here are some metrics:

If your averages are higher than the ones indicated above, congratulations, you are doing well! But...

 

If your current average gross price per image is lower than $22.90, these are possible reasons, among others:

1)    Your images are too similar to other images widely available in the market or being offered in MS sites for lower prices;

2)    Your images are more suitable for web use and are not attracting higher paying buyers;

3)    You have opted in for novel use in the additional revenue options, resulting in lower prices.

 

If you need more than 783 images on average to generate a sale, these are possible reasons, among others:

1)    Your images are not as appealing as similar images from fellow photographers;

2)    Your images are not being found by the buyers due to irrelevant keywords, keyword spamming or lack of keywords;

3)    Your portfolio has a high number of similar images or is limited in subject scope;

4)    Your images are off trend/not in demand.

 

Let’s assume we, as a group, had an average of 100 images for sale in 2018. Based on the numbers above, here is how many images we would need in the subsequent years to generate the same income as in 2018.

 

2018 = 100

2019 = 119

2020 = 149

2021 = 160

2022 = 190

2023 = 190

 

The upward trend of needing more images to generate the same gross revenue came to a halt last year due to the higher average price per image. However, we still need almost twice (+90%) as many images to generate the same income as 2018.

 

Good luck to all in 2024!

Rubens and all,

 

While I appreciate all the work Rubens put into coming up with these numbers, I do have a problem, just me and the way I've been for decades. I've been contributing to Alamy for nearly twenty years and I had a number of licenses (most call them sales, but I do not sell images) with less than 300 images online with Alamy.  From my experience, IT IS NOT THE NUMBER OF IMAGES A CONTRIBUTOR HAS ONLINE, BUT THE IMAGES, THE KEYWORDING AND CAPTION INFORMATION."  I've also been in the photo agency business for more than 40 years with a number of U.S. and international photo agencies and libraries.  Keep in mind that for most of that time I was dealing with news images and have taken and seen news images that have generated over $100,000.00 per image in licensing for one-time use.  In my opinion it is a disservice to propagate the idea that income on Alamy or in stock photography in general is "simply a numbers game"  It is about images and information.

 

While I have written many times that I believe Alamy could be doing a better job of getting higher licensing fees for images.  When I started contributing to Alamy in the 00's my average license fee was over $400.00 per image, after Alamy's commission.  In the 20's I've seen that drop to around $30.00 but the number of images that I have online with Alamy has increased as well as the number of licenses that Alamy is generating.  I would prefer fewer licenses for much higher fees.  Another fact to keep in mind is that the number of general circulation print magazines has gone down dramatically during the last couple of decades.

 

Just my thoughts, now I am going to go back to thinking about my sore muscles, I just spent the day skiing in the sunshine.

 

Chuck

[Rubens Alarcon]

6 hours ago, geogphotos said:

Personally, I don't much care about the mean or about the number of images per sale/per month ( mine is more like 1:2000 per month).  Money in the bank is all that really matters. 

 

A few other factors that could affect these stats:

 

exclusive or not

North American sales or not

RF or RM

 

Im 

 

 

Yes, your observations are correct about the reasons people post or not their results.

 

Yes, money in the bank is the bottom line, but if my portfolio was underperforming when compared to other contributors that posted results in the forum I'd like to know the reasons, after all, if I increase my portfolio overall efficiency I'll have more $ in the bank.

 

In regards to other factors that could affect the stats:

a) exclusive or not = There are a few contributors that are not exclusive and do better than others that are exclusive. Is that the norm? No, the results are all over the place. Could they do even better if they were exclusive? I believe they could do better at Alamy if they were selling RM images (see "c" below), but then they would have to let go of the additional revenue they can generate by providing the same images to other agencies.

b) North American sales or not = Yes, in my experience NA sales generate more $, but that is hard to quantify. Anyone can have NA sales as long as their images appeal to that market.

c) RF or RM = It is possible to do better than some contributors if you are selling RF images here, but looking from 2022 to 2024 (so far), all the contributors that did better than most are selling RM images or mostly RM images.

 

Rubens

[Gervais Montacute]

What I find interesting when the topic of what seems to be never ending numbers is that no one ever seems to bring up inflation. If you insert inflation figures into your numbers and apply, you're going to get very unhappy very quickly. Haha.

[Sultanpepa]

8 hours ago, Gervais Montacute said:

What I find interesting when the topic of what seems to be never ending numbers is that no one ever seems to bring up inflation. If you insert inflation figures into your numbers and apply, you're going to get very unhappy very quickly. Haha.

 

When I think of the money I've spent on photography equipment and what I get in return from Alamy/PA I want to bring up my dinner never mind inflation. 😂 Seriously though, I remember David Kilpatrick say that geographical location was a contributor to doing well on Alamy with Scotland not particularly the best place to be. Well, certainly true in as far as results for me are concerned, I tend to believe you've either got images that customers want or you don't. It seems that over the piece I don't.