Artwork Page Sponsorship

Good question, there are times I have seen it increase sales and other times the effort seems to not generate sales.

Its depend what are you promoting , if its good artwork people easy find it and buy it if its not promote does not help

Valerie

It takes some people a long time to get on the front pages of the search, for whatever reasons. Sponsoring ensures that, at least for some of the time, (depending how many other people have also sponsored that word), your images will appear on that front page. Pick the words carefully (abstract, landscape, animals, etc are well overused keywords) and then sponsor those

I think I'll give it a try...nothing to lose, right?! Thanks for your comments

exactly, nothing to lose. if it works then yay.

"exactly, nothing to lose."

Thatīs the point, Iīm not sure about. You have to place links somewhere on your website, that lead your visitors to a site full of competitors, and this for the very slim chance that your work will be shown.

I'm almost a month late to this discussion but I came here curious about page sponsorships. I have sponsored a handful of different keywords and phrases. Many of them are admittedly probably heavy with competition.

However, my understanding of page sponsorship was that once you've sponsored a keyword, your work is put into a pool with all of the other sponsored, keyword-matching images and then they are shown randomly in the third row and always before non-sponsored images.

Am I correct in believing this?

I ask because I find that with some of the keywords I've sponsored, I haven't seen my work pop up in even the first 3 or 4 pages of results... ever... no matter how many times I refresh the search results. That would probably be understandable given that there are so many other sponsored images for the keyword. But what sort of throws me off is that every time I've drilled down through the first half-dozen or first dozen pages of results, I get the distinct impression that I'm seeing the same 30-40 images achieve placement. This doesn't seem to make sense given that after the top 2 rows of results, the following results are supposed to be randomly selected from the sponsors. How are so many images seeming to get preferential placement?

I'm wondering if anybody else has noticed this behavior. Is there some component of the sponsorship system that I'm not understanding?

that's correct.

it will only be on the first page in the 3rd line and that's it. you'll have to refresh over and over to maybe see it.

everyone else are popular sellers, and that's how the search is sorted. don't depend on the search. you'll have to do your own marketing to get people to your page.



it also depends what you sponsored. if you did something like autumn, beach, mountain, etc - there will be 10,000 other people with those words.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

The two pages I attempted to sponsor yesterday, in two different places on the web were unsuccessful because both links from FAA that I copied and pasted were errors in the html. So I don't know..........I've tried but with no success.

be sure the page you put it on accepts html code. not all of them do. be sure you copied the whole line and didn't leave characters off.

---Mike Savad
MikeSavad.com

Mike,

You've actually cleared up my confusion. I had been under the incorrect impression that all search results from the third row onward were first a mix of randomly-ordered, sponsored images... then followed by non-sponsored images... with only the top two rows of the first page being "FAA's top picks". So, since it's only the third row on the first page, that explains why I've seen the same images again and again while searching my sponsored keywords.

I do have my own website with good SEO where all of my work can be found and I market it there. For me, FAA is purely a means of branching out to provide a lower-priced option for my website visitors. That being said, I am sort of disappointed to see that FAA's search algorithm is set up in such a way that it's essentially useless for folks that weren't here since the beginning and never had a chance to get a leg up. I agree that FAA's search engine shouldn't be relied upon exclusively, but I think it's undoubtedly an avenue that a huge number of FAA customers use to find what they are looking for. IN that regard, I was hoping it would at least be a tool I could leverage to some benefit... I'm seeing now that that isn't really the case unfortunately.

On one hand, I understand that FAA would assume that top-sellers will make them more money... it's only natural, then, that they would feature them first. On the other hand, by so heavily favoring only the work that is already a big-seller, there's scant room for anything new to pop-up for all but the most unique keywords. Because they do it this way, the chances are fairly high that the same images which place in the first five pages of search results now for a given keyword, will probably not change much over the next couple of YEARS, since FAA is intentionally directing all buyer traffic only to the old, big-sellers and explicitly diverting traffic from new uploads (some of which may well be promising competitors if the search engine gave them a shot).

It is what it is, I guess. Like I said, I see FAA's reasoning. I just wish that they could find a better way to mix up the search results in order to give new uploads a fighting chance in their target keywords.