pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Getty has a new CEO  (Read 26472 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« on: September 20, 2015, 09:02 »
+1
I wish her luck. But my cynical side says they hired a woman to set her up for a fall. Hope I'm wrong. This part is typical Getty: "Getty Images led the industry into the digital age and has been responsible for every major innovation in the visual content business." Please.  ::)

http://press.gettyimages.com/getty-images-appoints-dawn-airey-as-chief-executive-officer/


« Reply #1 on: September 20, 2015, 09:28 »
+8
You don't need access to every aspect of a medical report to know a patient in dying.

« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2015, 11:21 »
+4
Her CV looks very good. Glad they finally found someone.

Now we will have to wait and see what her next steps are.

But at least the ship has a captain again.

Good luck!

« Reply #3 on: September 20, 2015, 12:29 »
+17
Her CV looks very good. Glad they finally found someone.

Now we will have to wait and see what her next steps are.

But at least the ship has a captain again.

Good luck!
The Costa Concordia had a captain.

« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2015, 12:40 »
+1
The Financial Times has an article on this

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0f9b06e8-5e49-11e5-a28b-50226830d644.html?siteedition=intl#slide0

I know nothing about her, but coming from Yahoo (another struggling business) isn't a good sign IMO.

Jonathan Klein "interviewing" Dawn Airey

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gdZQ-WLuDF0

Some other coverage

http://www.geekwire.com/2015/getty-images-taps-media-veteran-dawn-airey-as-ceo/

http://www.thedrum.com/news/2015/09/20/getty-images-hires-former-yahoo-european-chief-dawn-airey-chief-exec

Edited to add a couple more articles about her, her departure from Yahoo:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/digital-media/11856987/Yahoo-Europe-boss-Dawn-Airey-out-after-two-years.html

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/sep/10/dawn-airey-quits-as-yahoos-european-boss-after-two-years

This Wikipedia entry isn't up to date (has her still at Yahoo) but I found the reported nicknames for her - she's apparently "forthright" - funny: Scary Airey and Zulu Dawn!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawn_Airey

An April interview about Yahoo in Europe having a renaissance year

http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/dawn-airey-predicts-renaissance-year-yahoo/1343799


« Last Edit: September 20, 2015, 22:18 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #5 on: September 20, 2015, 13:09 »
0
They are trying to raise news money as well.  Perhaps the timing is just a coincidence or maybe the bondholders demanded some fresh blood at the top?

« Reply #6 on: September 20, 2015, 13:13 »
+1
First thing she needs to do, dump all collections. Just House, RM, RF and "micro"

« Reply #7 on: September 20, 2015, 13:28 »
+1
Perhaps she'll start a microstock price war, that would be great....

« Reply #8 on: September 20, 2015, 16:42 »
+4
Near the end of the interview she mentioned nurturing the photographer so they produce their best work. It was glossed over by kelvin because she was referencing this to reaching higher. If she is allowed to follow this concept there is hope but the chairman may never let that happen. It is sad that Getty has a history of treating it's artist poorly!

« Reply #9 on: September 20, 2015, 16:55 »
+1
Near the end of the interview she mentioned nurturing the photographer so they produce their best work. It was glossed over by kelvin because she was referencing this to reaching higher. If she is allowed to follow this concept there is hope but the chairman may never let that happen. It is sad that Getty has a history of treating it's artist poorly!
One can always hope but the best predicator of the future is an analysis of the near past.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #10 on: September 20, 2015, 17:37 »
+3
"Airey is currently part of a UK Government-selected panel charged with reviewing the BBCs charter renewal."
Grief, she has it in her hands to double my misery.  ::) (Or otherwise, but INHMB.)

madman

    This user is banned.
« Reply #11 on: September 21, 2015, 07:31 »
+6
please new CEO!... take a look at and "SEE" what we have suffered in recent years, here is my 2015 sale graph on istock, how deplorable is, isn't it?

General sales down, new crappy SUBSCRIPTION sales down, PP down, all the way is down....
« Last Edit: September 21, 2015, 07:37 by madman »

« Reply #12 on: September 21, 2015, 08:34 »
0
please new CEO!... take a look at and "SEE" what we have suffered in recent years, here is my 2015 sale graph on istock, how deplorable is, isn't it?

General sales down, new crappy SUBSCRIPTION sales down, PP down, all the way is down....

madman. Did not you drop your exclusivity
on July 2015?

madman

    This user is banned.
« Reply #13 on: September 21, 2015, 11:02 »
+2
please new CEO!... take a look at and "SEE" what we have suffered in recent years, here is my 2015 sale graph on istock, how deplorable is, isn't it?

General sales down, new crappy SUBSCRIPTION sales down, PP down, all the way is down....

madman. Did not you drop your exclusivity
on July 2015?

yes, but it doesnt matter if I leave or not, sales are constantly decreasing day by day, it is the reason that I left the exclusivity.

« Reply #14 on: September 21, 2015, 11:59 »
0
She has a strong background with video, so maybe there will be some progress there.

« Reply #15 on: September 22, 2015, 08:53 »
+8
a number of posts were removed for a) being off topic and b) accusations towards another member which may or may not have been true.

I agree we should try and stick together and point out portoflios that are possibly infringement, but at the same time I don't want this forum to start accusing other rmembers of things when they may or may not be true.

« Reply #16 on: September 22, 2015, 16:13 »
+6
New CEO may bring some changes. It can be good or bad. I am not very hopeful because Klein is still her boss.

Let's hope she will not harm our earnings even more by increasing short term profit for her boss. In the long run, it will not do Getty much good either as it has been proven.

« Reply #17 on: September 23, 2015, 02:02 »
+7
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

FlowerPower

« Reply #18 on: September 23, 2015, 12:16 »
+4
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

« Reply #19 on: September 23, 2015, 21:28 »
+2
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

Justanotherphotographer

« Reply #20 on: September 24, 2015, 03:22 »
+2
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?
Actually Getty doesn't have much control either, so GI/IS is like a satrap to his servants I guess, what we are I can't even guess. The company is just a vehicle for debt for the fund that owns it.

« Reply #21 on: September 24, 2015, 07:40 »
+3
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.

« Reply #22 on: September 24, 2015, 20:08 »
+3
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.

Here we go again! Once more "Greed" as THE explanation! :)
When will people stop falling for buzzwords and fashionable pseudo-intellectual arguments?

Just to be clear, at your level, you are as "greedy" as they are, for example when you ask for a better pay. The same goes for everybody else who try their best for themselves and for people that matter to them.

He that is without "greed" among you, let him first cast a stone....

The butcher is serving you well not because of his generosity, but because it is in HIS interest to serve you well, or because of his "greed", if you insist in using this word. When he stops serving you well, you only have to switch butchers and he will be penalized.
When he stops serving you well, not "greed", but his lack of understanding of his market, his competition and his customers will sink his business.

If there is something to be blamed about Getty, is not greed, but their incapacity to keep up with the competition, to innovate, to have a decent relation with their suppliers... iStock's RPD is the shame of the industry!
« Last Edit: September 24, 2015, 20:22 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #23 on: September 24, 2015, 23:16 »
0
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.

Here we go again! Once more "Greed" as THE explanation! :)
When will people stop falling for buzzwords and fashionable pseudo-intellectual arguments?

Just to be clear, at your level, you are as "greedy" as they are, for example when you ask for a better pay. The same goes for everybody else who try their best for themselves and for people that matter to them.

He that is without "greed" among you, let him first cast a stone....

The butcher is serving you well not because of his generosity, but because it is in HIS interest to serve you well, or because of his "greed", if you insist in using this word. When he stops serving you well, you only have to switch butchers and he will be penalized.
When he stops serving you well, not "greed", but his lack of understanding of his market, his competition and his customers will sink his business.

If there is something to be blamed about Getty, is not greed, but their incapacity to keep up with the competition, to innovate, to have a decent relation with their suppliers... iStock's RPD is the shame of the industry!
Okay then it's a innate desire to repress.

« Reply #24 on: September 24, 2015, 23:40 »
+3
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.

Here we go again! Once more "Greed" as THE explanation! :)
When will people stop falling for buzzwords and fashionable pseudo-intellectual arguments?

Just to be clear, at your level, you are as "greedy" as they are, for example when you ask for a better pay. The same goes for everybody else who try their best for themselves and for people that matter to them.
Gosh! How I miss the minus button  :-\

 -100000000000000000000000000000  :)

« Reply #25 on: September 25, 2015, 06:23 »
+1


Gosh! How I miss the minus button  :-

 -100000000000000000000000000000  :)

Wow, what a powerful argument! What a deep understanding of the complex world we live in!

+1 from me!

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk


« Reply #26 on: September 25, 2015, 07:10 »
+4
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.

Here we go again! Once more "Greed" as THE explanation! :)
When will people stop falling for buzzwords and fashionable pseudo-intellectual arguments?

Just to be clear, at your level, you are as "greedy" as they are, for example when you ask for a better pay. The same goes for everybody else who try their best for themselves and for people that matter to them.

He that is without "greed" among you, let him first cast a stone....

The butcher is serving you well not because of his generosity, but because it is in HIS interest to serve you well, or because of his "greed", if you insist in using this word. When he stops serving you well, you only have to switch butchers and he will be penalized.
When he stops serving you well, not "greed", but his lack of understanding of his market, his competition and his customers will sink his business.

If there is something to be blamed about Getty, is not greed, but their incapacity to keep up with the competition, to innovate, to have a decent relation with their suppliers... iStock's RPD is the shame of the industry!

I beg to differ. When I say greed I mean it. I am sorry you are offended by my comments, but when they decide to give contributors $6-$7 for HD video and no more for 4k I would call that greed, not good "Getty" business (Getty owns Istock in case you forgot). For that reason I have not uploaded any 4k and stopped HD. They will not see another clip from me.  It's a business decision I made based on Getty's conscious decision to use contributors as a financial stepping. The decision to chop video commissions (as an example) into little tiny pieces is not based on sound business decisions, rather greed-driven behaviors, one reason of which can be linked to their horrible management that put them in great debt.

Definition of greed from Merriam: a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed

I honestly don't understand how you can say otherwise, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 07:12 by Mantis »

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #27 on: September 25, 2015, 07:15 »
0
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.

Here we go again! Once more "Greed" as THE explanation! :)
When will people stop falling for buzzwords and fashionable pseudo-intellectual arguments?

Just to be clear, at your level, you are as "greedy" as they are, for example when you ask for a better pay. The same goes for everybody else who try their best for themselves and for people that matter to them.

He that is without "greed" among you, let him first cast a stone....

The butcher is serving you well not because of his generosity, but because it is in HIS interest to serve you well, or because of his "greed", if you insist in using this word. When he stops serving you well, you only have to switch butchers and he will be penalized.
When he stops serving you well, not "greed", but his lack of understanding of his market, his competition and his customers will sink his business.

If there is something to be blamed about Getty, is not greed, but their incapacity to keep up with the competition, to innovate, to have a decent relation with their suppliers... iStock's RPD is the shame of the industry!

I beg to differ. When I say greed I mean it. I am sorry you are offended by my comments, but when they decide to give contributors $6-$7 for HD video and no more for 4k I would call that greed, not good "Getty" business (Getty owns Istock in case you forgot). For that reason I have not uploaded any 4k and stopped HD. They will not see another clip from me.  It's a business decision I made based on Getty's conscious decision to use contributors as a financial stepping. The decision to chop video commissions (as an example) into little tiny pieces is not based on sound business decisions, rather greed-driven behaviors, one reason of which can be linked to their horrible management that put them in great debt.

Definition of greed from Merriam: a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed
I'm totally on your side; but the Devil's Advocate could argue that screwing contributors is 'needed' to pay off their debt.  >:(

« Reply #28 on: September 25, 2015, 07:17 »
+3
I also stopped uploading videos to IS, for the same reasons.
That Merriam definition means nothing. Define excessive? Is it the average world income or what?
If yes, do you make more than $18.000/year from all your activities? Probably.
Then you are "greedy" if you keep for you anything in excess of $18.000, instead of donating it to those in need across the world.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

« Reply #29 on: September 25, 2015, 07:24 »
0
I also stopped uploading videos to IS, for the same reasons.
That Merriam definition means nothing. Define excessive? Is it the average world income or what?
If yes, do you make more than $18.000/year from all your activities? Probably.
Then you are "greedy" if you keep for you anything in excess of $18.000, instead of donating it to those in need across the world.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Well that's a stretch. You really have no clue what I donate, what my charitable activities are and how I greedily spend my money. I do make way more than $18K.  But I also put a wife through college, put a kid through college, bought a home for my family, used my income to care for my now deceased mother, and still manage to give some of whatever I have left to animal and children's charities.  I would say that, for me, I am far from greedy.

« Reply #30 on: September 25, 2015, 07:30 »
+3
I also stopped uploading videos to IS, for the same reasons.
That Merriam definition means nothing. Define excessive? Is it the average world income or what?
If yes, do you make more than $18.000/year from all your activities? Probably.
Then you are "greedy" if you keep for you anything in excess of $18.000, instead of donating it to those in need across the world.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Well that's a stretch. You really have no clue what I donate, what my charitable activities are and how I greedily spend my money. I do make way more than $18K.  But I also put a wife through college, put a kid through college, bought a home for my family, used my income to care for my now deceased mother, and still manage to give some of whatever I have left to animal and children's charities.  I would say that, for me, I am far from greedy.

It is not a stretch, it is logic.
See? It is not easy to define "excess", therefore it is not easy, if not impossible, to define "greed", a word you easily juggle with.
$18.000/year is a fortune for some poor African farmer who can only dream to see the kids of his kids go to college someday, etc.

WE are never "greedy", only others are.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 09:33 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #31 on: September 25, 2015, 08:12 »
+2
I also stopped uploading videos to IS, for the same reasons.
That Merriam definition means nothing. Define excessive? Is it the average world income or what?
If yes, do you make more than $18.000/year from all your activities? Probably.
Then you are "greedy" if you keep for you anything in excess of $18.000, instead of donating it to those in need across the world.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
-1 

« Reply #32 on: September 25, 2015, 08:16 »
0
-1  ;D

Nobody can stand a chance against you in a debate! You are a thoughtful individual, indeed!

One more +1 from me!  ;)

« Reply #33 on: September 25, 2015, 09:09 »
+1
We live in a world where even the church, religions are greedy, in spite of their already existing fortunes. How can we then expect ordinary low down to earth corporations, businesses, shop-keepers, whatever, to prefer to give rather then take. LOL, that will never happen. A dream.
Look upon it this way. If they were not greedy, none of us would be in business. It works both ways.

« Reply #34 on: September 25, 2015, 10:03 »
0
Zero Talent, I imagine you thinking that Volkswagen's recent problems are fair game as well.

ShadySue

  • There is a crack in everything
« Reply #35 on: September 25, 2015, 10:04 »
+4
Politics and ethics apart, this CEO will have been appointed to boost Getty's fortunes.
I doubt if she'll have any remit for contributors.
End of.

« Reply #36 on: September 25, 2015, 10:20 »
+2
Zero Talent, I imagine you thinking that Volkswagen's recent problems are fair game as well.

Of course not!

What is interesting is that it was not a governmental agency who discovered the cheating, but some non-profit association with interest in promoting "green cars".

One more time, big government bureaucrats from all these over-dimensioned regulating agencies proved themselves useless.
They only suck capital out of the market and form us, the consumers, to justify their own existence, while being in bed with lobbyists and big corporations (who are always looking for  special laws, exemptions and favors, in exchange for election funds)

Now, in a free market environment consumers can decide to penalize such practices and stop buying VW cars or pay the extra costs if they want drive greener cars, or not (I drive a small Prius C, btw).

While never perfect, the market forces fueled by the consumers freedom to chose will always be more efficient and smarter than some artificial regulation.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 11:25 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #37 on: September 25, 2015, 11:35 »
+2
Politics and ethics apart, this CEO will have been appointed to boost Getty's fortunes.


Exactly! And there is nothing wrong with that!

She will push the limits as long as contributors will tolerate such behaviour and continue to be interested in an iStock collaboration.
If she is smart, she will know where to stop. If not, she will alienate most of us and further sink her ship.

For starters, boycotting her video business is definitely something to be encouraged.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 11:39 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #38 on: September 25, 2015, 11:40 »
+1
Zero Talent, I imagine you thinking that Volkswagen's recent problems are fair game as well.

Of course not!

What is interesting is that it was not a governmental agency who discovered the cheating, but some non-profit association with interest in promoting "green cars".

One more time, big government bureaucrats from all these over-dimensioned regulating agencies proved themselves useless.
They only suck capital out of the market and form us, the consumers, to justify their own existence, while being in bed with lobbyists and big corporations (who are always looking for  special laws, exemptions and favors, in exchange for election funds)

Now, in a free market environment consumers can decide to penalize such practices and stop buying VW cars or pay the extra costs if they want drive greener cars, or not (I drive a small Prius C, btw).

While never perfect, the market forces fueled by the consumers freedom to chose will always be more efficient and smarter than some artificial regulation.

A good market relies on consumer knowledge while imperfect as they may be without regulators consumers would have to rely on the manufacturers to tell them the truth or do their own testing.

« Reply #39 on: September 25, 2015, 12:00 »
+1
Zero Talent, I imagine you thinking that Volkswagen's recent problems are fair game as well.

Of course not!

What is interesting is that it was not a governmental agency who discovered the cheating, but some non-profit association with interest in promoting "green cars".

One more time, big government bureaucrats from all these over-dimensioned regulating agencies proved themselves useless.
They only suck capital out of the market and form us, the consumers, to justify their own existence, while being in bed with lobbyists and big corporations (who are always looking for  special laws, exemptions and favors, in exchange for election funds)

Now, in a free market environment consumers can decide to penalize such practices and stop buying VW cars or pay the extra costs if they want drive greener cars, or not (I drive a small Prius C, btw).

While never perfect, the market forces fueled by the consumers freedom to chose will always be more efficient and smarter than some artificial regulation.

A good market relies on consumer knowledge while imperfect as they may be without regulators consumers would have to rely on the manufacturers to tell them the truth or do their own testing.

Governmental agencies have no way to check everything and enforce mountains of regulations. Consumers can. Consumers are everywhere.

When I buy something from Amazon, choose a hotel, a restaurant, hire a contractor, etc, etc, I trust much more reviews from my peer consumers, than any other governmental specification. I bet you do the same.

Technology makes this feedback loop faster and easier than ever. It is more than ever the age of crowdsourcing and sharing.

Look at Uber, look at how cheap and mutual beneficial, both for consumers and contributors, such a modern enterprise is. A lot of governments fight the progress trying to impose regulations (under the pressure of special interest groups, like taxi unions who obviously fight for what's best from themselves) against what's good for consumers.

Look how microstock has offered the possibility to hundreds of thousands of amateurs to make an extra buck.
Do you think microstock must be regulated by some governmental agency, to make sure no crappy photos are sold to consumers?
Do you think photographers must be licensed in order to contribute to microstock?
I hope not!
As long as it is let to operate freely, the market will deal with this issue much better than any governmental bureaucracy.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 12:11 by Zero Talent »

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #40 on: September 25, 2015, 12:16 »
+1
I wouldn't mind if there were regulations requiring stock agencies to pay a fair royalty rate. Independent artists' reps take a 20-25% commission, not 50-85% as taken by stock agencies.

And of courses, individual consumers do not have the knowledge, expertise or resources necessary to check the safety of everything they buy. You'd be requiring them to test every piece of chicken for salmonella; every car to make sure it doesn't have software installed to outwit environmental regulations (not that there would be any regulations) and emit 40x as many pollutants as claimed; every toy to make sure it has no lead paint or small parts for children to swallow; every house to make sure plumbing and electrical is up to code (not that there would be any code, of course).

« Reply #41 on: September 25, 2015, 12:48 »
+2
I wouldn't mind if there were regulations requiring stock agencies to pay a fair royalty rate. Independent artists' reps take a 20-25% commission, not 50-85% as taken by stock agencies.

And of courses, individual consumers do not have the knowledge, expertise or resources necessary to check the safety of everything they buy. You'd be requiring them to test every piece of chicken for salmonella; every car to make sure it doesn't have software installed to outwit environmental regulations (not that there would be any regulations) and emit 40x as many pollutants as claimed; every toy to make sure it has no lead paint or small parts for children to swallow; every house to make sure plumbing and electrical is up to code (not that there would be any code, of course).

Of course you wouldn't mind! It can be in your interest to have such regulation. But it will not be in favor of the consumers, since they will have to bear the extra costs.

You have to understand that ALL interest groups apply these tactics. Even if you get more from microstock, you already have a net loss from the other regulations limiting competition in too many domains.
The only clear winners will be the governmental bureaucrats, happy to expand their control over microstock and justify higher taxes needed to finance another regulating agency.

It is in taxi driver's interest to have regulations preventing Uber to operate cheaper than licensed taxis. This works against consumers who have limited choice, being forced to accept smelly cars and rude drivers who have all their certifications in order.

The same goes for all your other examples.

No government will ever test every chicken you buy to make sure you stay healthy. This is impossible. Despite all regulations, you might still buy bad food.
It is not the government who protects you, but the self interest of the chicken farmer, combined with your own decision process. The chicken farmer has a very strong incentive to keep you a happy customer. An unfortunate event can become a death sentence for his business.

I repeat, the VW cheat has not been discovered by a governmental agency, but by a private non-profit organization. Where was the regulator all these years?

Private certification companies like Zagat, Yelp, TripAdvisor, etc do a much better good for society, than such impotent but expensive governmental agencies.

But you must give credit to these agencies for doing such a great job in convincing you and so many others, that everything they do is in your interest, not theirs.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 13:39 by Zero Talent »

Shelma1

  • stockcoalition.org
« Reply #42 on: September 25, 2015, 12:53 »
+1
I'm guessing you're unaware of the peanut butter executive who was just sentenced to 28 years in prison for knowingly distributing tainted peanut butter.

« Reply #43 on: September 25, 2015, 13:06 »
0
I'm guessing you're unaware of the peanut butter executive who was just sentenced to 28 years in prison for knowingly distributing tainted peanut butter.

Very tragic, indeed.
Again, where was the regulator when needed? What has US FDA done to prevent the killings? Nothing! Regulations were useless in this case.
A conviction for murder would have happened even in the absence of regulations
These things happened to even a greater extent in societies where the government controlled everything (especially because no government employee cares about a business more than an owner). Think only about pollution in China and other former communist countries.
We do not live in a perfect world. It is noble to try to make the world perfect and I understand this ideal. But one must carefully choose the way to perfection and make sure that more good is achieved than bad.
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 13:21 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #44 on: September 25, 2015, 13:47 »
+1
So we should have no police cos one person gets away with murder? All regulation will fail to some extent but it doesn't follow we should have none!

Oh and do you think everyone should be allowed to copy and resell your work - how does the "market" cope with that?
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 13:49 by Pauws99 »

« Reply #45 on: September 25, 2015, 14:25 »
+1
So we should have no police cos one person gets away with murder? All regulation will fail to some extent but it doesn't follow we should have none!

Oh and do you think everyone should be allowed to copy and resell your work - how does the "market" cope with that?

Of course not.

Free market and liberty have never meant that everybody is free to do no matter what!
My liberty stops where your liberty is impacted! All human relations, transaction, interactions are exclusively based on mutual agreements.
A free market has the life and property rights, the pursue of self-interest (read happiness) embedded in it. These are axioms. These are "unalienable rights".

Free market never meant chaos. Free market doesn't exclude courts, where such disputes can be addressed and penalties imposed.
Even more, I believe that it is a governmental duty, indeed, to ensure public safety and a proper operation of such courts of law.

Copyright thieves as all other property thieves are obviously prosecuted, since they break the "unalienable right" to private property.

What is excluded is the involvement of the government monopoly in economical matters. This will always lead to ever more authoritarian governments and crony capitalism.

« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 16:03 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #46 on: September 25, 2015, 15:49 »
+1


"Even more, I believe that it is a governmental duty, indeed, to ensure public safety and a proper operation of such courts of law."

Except when it comes to chicken farmers and toxic emissions from vehicles?


« Reply #47 on: September 25, 2015, 16:47 »
+1
God i wish there was a boot button. I seldom come into this site these days and when i do its to find out whats been going on in this industry and why do i feel like zero talent has to hijack these threads with his narrow minded views on life. Yeah we get it, you dont think anyone is greedy and big govt messes everything up. can we move on? ::)

« Reply #48 on: September 25, 2015, 16:50 »
0
Shouldn't really have got dragged into a discussion that belongs on a politics for the already know it alls site

« Reply #49 on: September 25, 2015, 17:10 »
+1


"Even more, I believe that it is a governmental duty, indeed, to ensure public safety and a proper operation of such courts of law."

Except when it comes to chicken farmers and toxic emissions from vehicles?

As explained above, the regulator has not done anything to prevent food poisoning or automakers like VW to limit toxic emissions. Why paying taxes and support their inefficient activities?

The answer is: No, the government should not interfere with these economical matters.
There are much better and more efficient ways to deal with risks in life, than trusting a bureaucrat to take care of you. Since when a bureaucrat knows better than you, what is good for you and what not?

All human activities involve some degree of risk. Every individual must be allowed to decide how much risk to take and how much extra to pay to avoid or minimise a specific risk. No government nor regulation will make your life risk free.

How many people died because an FDA bureaucrat didn't approve fast enough a new life saving drug? Nobody is counting those lost lives.

If you want regulations you should ask yourself: who regulates the regulator?
Who is protecting you from errors made by the government?
« Last Edit: September 25, 2015, 17:45 by Zero Talent »

PaulieWalnuts

  • We Have Exciting News For You
« Reply #50 on: September 25, 2015, 17:53 »
+3
Honestly I have seen these management changes so much during all the years I have been there, some 15 years and no dice for the members so its hard to be optimistic.
As far as the GI/IS relationship its even worse. I know people there who are double even black-Diamonds and they are getting like two downloads a day.
The syaing used to be " from rags to riches" in this case its " from riches to rags" :(

Good to know I'm doing much better then black diamonds. The GI/IS relationship is like king and the house servants. IS is worse then the ugly step child of Getty. New CEO might make IS have some leader for a change, because right now the workers are all sheep afraid to do anything. 6 months for a support answer if you get an answer at all?

We can all give her a chance and then by April determine that A leopard can't change its spots. Getty is behind this, nothing will be different for us. We will get the same terrible earnings, or less. They will find ways to undercut our earnings and blow smoke up our accounts telling us how much we should be happy. Nothing will change or things will get worse. That's my prediction.

I was going to type something similar but you said it well. With the greed and debt Getty/IS is in, any upward commission adjustment simply takes away from their ability to deliver to those two factors.

Here we go again! Once more "Greed" as THE explanation! :)
When will people stop falling for buzzwords and fashionable pseudo-intellectual arguments?

Just to be clear, at your level, you are as "greedy" as they are, for example when you ask for a better pay. The same goes for everybody else who try their best for themselves and for people that matter to them.

He that is without "greed" among you, let him first cast a stone....

The butcher is serving you well not because of his generosity, but because it is in HIS interest to serve you well, or because of his "greed", if you insist in using this word. When he stops serving you well, you only have to switch butchers and he will be penalized.
When he stops serving you well, not "greed", but his lack of understanding of his market, his competition and his customers will sink his business.

If there is something to be blamed about Getty, is not greed, but their incapacity to keep up with the competition, to innovate, to have a decent relation with their suppliers... iStock's RPD is the shame of the industry!

Greed, business practice, or whatever anyone wants to call it, in a agent/distributor relationship each party wants to get as much and give as little as possible. Right now agencies/distributors have the upper hand in the get lots and give little game.

Unfortunately, by contributors continuing to flock to micro sites and send gazillions of images we are telling these sites we are super-happy with the current deal. And they will continue to give us less and we will continue to say thank you for giving us less by sending bazillions more images. Maybe one day when we're earning under 10% but don't know if because of some vague license scheme we'll finally have had enough. Oh wait...

Regarding the CEO, who knows what'll happen. Hopefully something better than what's happened with past personnel changes. 

« Reply #51 on: September 26, 2015, 01:17 »
0
So you don't believe what I quoted from your own post
 :-\"Even more, I believe that it is a governmental duty, indeed, to ensure public safety and a proper operation of such courts of law."

« Reply #52 on: September 26, 2015, 01:33 »
0
So you don't believe what I quoted from your own post
 :-\"Even more, I believe that it is a governmental duty, indeed, to ensure public safety and a proper operation of such courts of law."
I thought I clarified this matter: by public safety, I mean police/national defense, and not interference in economy or rules about how big a cup of coke must be in order to keep me healthy.

But maybe it is better to go back to that iStock video boycott.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2015, 01:43 by Zero Talent »

« Reply #53 on: October 01, 2015, 14:05 »
0
oh wow - the stink in the room - the reason they hired a women? maybe take your cynical self out of your cave? awesome stupidity . . . probably a big whiner too

FlowerPower

« Reply #54 on: October 01, 2015, 16:13 »
+1
oh wow - the stink in the room - the reason they hired a women? maybe take your cynical self out of your cave? awesome stupidity . . . probably a big whiner too

You can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a pig. No not the new CEO, I mean Getty hiring a woman is putting lipstick on the iStock pig. I don't expect anything to change for the better. They cut staff, services and commissions. Takes 2 months to get paid. What's next?

« Reply #55 on: October 01, 2015, 16:26 »
+5
What has the fact the new CEO is a woman got to do with anything? :-\

FlowerPower

« Reply #56 on: October 02, 2015, 18:22 »
+3
What has the fact the new CEO is a woman got to do with anything? :-\

Has nothing to do but joke, just like a new CEO has nothing to do with what Getty orders her to do, is also a joke. Nothing is going to change.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
3117 Views
Last post January 15, 2013, 09:07
by BaldricksTrousers
28 Replies
10151 Views
Last post July 15, 2013, 06:10
by tickstock
16 Replies
4702 Views
Last post March 29, 2014, 03:15
by stockphotoeurope
2 Replies
2516 Views
Last post May 20, 2014, 12:12
by ethan
5 Replies
3961 Views
Last post June 19, 2015, 06:31
by chrisdorney

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors