sweet!

Congrats disorderly!  Very nice to hear. 

Let me know if the sales become steady, rather than just the occasional big score on EL's. 

It would be great to see them pick up, but since I pulled my port from there due to lack of sales (and exclusivity plans, which are on hold at the moment for well-known reasons) it would be a huge hassle to reupload. 

I still think there could be a nice upsurge in sales there when they start spending money on marketing.  SV never took off but the site was a mess and had lots of problems.  Veer MP seem to be doing better and there is still the opportunity for Corbis to get in to the microstock market if they really want to.

My sales aren't great there but at least I am getting some each month and there are signs of life.  A lot of new sites are really struggling to get any sales going.

Cooooooooooooool! Congrats! I wish you many more!

Once I waked up with an extended license worth of $40.25, I was surprised too.

I refuse to upload any more until I see a noticeable uptick in the sales trend, or until I hear that their reviewers have regained their senses.  It was getting pretty offensive.  One day a certain type of image would be accepted, and the next day an image in the same style or subject matter would be rejected as not commercial or poor quality.  Or a reviewer would reject an entire batch of diverse images as being too similar. Etc. Etc. Etc.

+1
Veer would be doing very fine, if they would decommission most of their reviewers and replace them by people that know microstock. In my case, they only showed a great talent to reject my best sellers for LCV and accept my lesser shots. One can live with tight standards (as in IS) but not with unpredictability.

It's my impression that the main thing holding Veer back is what appears to be their contempt for the microstock model.  In other words, they simply don't believe in their product, so how can they possibly be successful?

Why do I think they have contempt for microstock? Massive senseless rejections right out from the start tell me they regard our work as little more than throw away junk. And, the massive rejections continue, despite the fact that many contributors got fed up and left them, and this while they don't even have the downloads and sales to attract new contributors to replace those who have left. They don't value our contributions, which is why they have not bothered to do anything about the poor quality of their inspection team, which is clearly unqualified to review microstock imagery.

Think of how Fotolia bent over backwards to please us when they first started; they didn't start treating us poorly (lowering commissions, changing the canister levels, ect) until they became very successful. Veer, by contrast, started treating contributors poorly from the start. Oh, there were lots of encouraging words from their representative on this site, but their actions spoke otherwise. They have never even attempted to explain the massive rejections. I, in turn, rejected them -- After the first massive rejection of my uploads, I pulled my work from their site and I've never regretted it. I don't want to work with people who have no respect for what I do.

Take the above with a grain of salt, no, a BIG chunk of salt - because these are my impressions and nothing else. I'm just curious to see if anyone else sees the situation as I do.

I don't agree with your assessment, Alisa.  My first encounter with Fotolia was rather unpleasant (nine rejections from my first ten, with the lone acceptance a Photoshop effort based on scanned content), and it took a while before I tried again.  I've never been happy with their review process, and of course far less so as they've cut my percentage twice and pretty much guaranteed I'll never see an increase.  They make me money and their upload process isn't too painful, so I persevere.

Veer's an unknown quantity.  I had so many rejections among my model shots that I stopped uploading them.  And yet... the three extended licenses yesterday were all models.  So I'll try uploading some more, and when many/most are rejected, well, I'll hope what's left makes money.  I think they're wrong in their rejections, but hey, it's their site.  I'll upload if they get me sales, and stop if they stop.

There are sites I prefer and sites I don't particularly like.  But this is business, so I make my choices based on a cost/benefit basis.  But not entirely, or I'd have given up the whole thing long ago as worse than minimum wage.

With 10 initial images online I had 20 views in total (around July / August last year), then nothing. I added 20 images some months ago, and still no views in the months after August. Why is this? I'm sure you guys are getting regular views?

Oh, and no sales of course.

the odd sale with about 2500 images on (mostly transfers from snap and missing a lot of my better sellers), crestock sells more (they just dont make payouts and are to be gotten rid of).

Like everyone else reviews seem totally random (images with 1000's downloads across all sites, rejected as dated etc). I'm still uploading because its easy, but I treat them like I did crestock. Heres some  images, if you want them good, if not who cares I'm not bothering to see what you accept / reject because I'll learn nothing, get nothing out of doing so.

I'm not anti-Veer just indifferent and like with snapvillage, I get the feeling they dont really know what they are doing regarding microstock.  Snap seemed 'come on all you amateur holiday snappers' and no real idea what they wanted, who their contributors were etc, with veer it seems the opposite, 'we are a macro agency that is begrudgingly lowering ourselves to microstock' and its beneath them. Maybe dead wrong, just the feeling that I get.

yesterday 45.5$, today 1.2$.. it promises!

I got images rejected by Veers due to resolution,what is the size of the images you got on Veers,I tried to e-mail them but no luck. (mail got returned)