Largely not, at least according to industry analyst Dan Heller, who just authored a trademark-length post on insiders lying about photo licensing. Though not maliciously, many of those who share information on licensing fees and earnings lean “towards the kinds of answers you would like to be true,” Heller thinks. The meta point of his analysis is that all of the commonplace financial assumptions about stock licensing may be false in a rather fundamental way.
“What … if it turns out that agencies only make up 60% of the market? 30%? 15%? Or less? Would stock agencies start focusing attention on consumers? Would non-photo related media companies start eying photo agencies and social networks as a new, untapped source for potential revenue?” Heller thinks that new technologies, such as those from PicScout, will shortly help answer such questions.