MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: Lee Torrens on March 23, 2009, 13:45
-
Big day in microstock. The founder of the first and arguably still the most successful microstock agency, iStockphoto, has today announced his resignation.
Great news for Bruce - significant day for the industry - and a nervous day for everyone involved with iStock.
Here's the forum link: http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=86073
-
I always find it hard to believe when the self-confessed workaholic and visionary leader of an organization resigns to "make some time for myself and the people in my life".
I wonder - is this a harbinger of sea-change at iStock?
-
I am surprised he hung on for as long as he did. So many take overs are followed by resignations, purges, etc.
-
I always find it hard to believe when the self-confessed workaholic and visionary leader of an organization resigns to "make some time for myself and the people in my life".
I wonder - is this a harbinger of sea-change at iStock?
It's never for those reasons, although that is the official press release. I think something happens to the owner when he's no longer the owner. Perhaps he considers an idea or a direction the company should go and finds himself up against a board of directors or some other official who doesn't see it that way. I don't think it takes that long before it's time to leave.
-
I always find it hard to believe when the self-confessed workaholic and visionary leader of an organization resigns to "make some time for myself and the people in my life".
I wonder - is this a harbinger of sea-change at iStock?
That depends on who takes over and how this changes the iStock-Getty relationship.
I am surprised he hung on for as long as he did. So many take overs are followed by resignations, purges, etc.
He may have had a contractual obligation to stay on after the sale. It's just gone three years since the sale. Although they seemed to enjoy great independence, so I'm sure he still enjoyed himself (it certainly looked that way to me).
-
regardless the real reasons it is indeed a very big news for microstok
-
I always find it hard to believe when the self-confessed workaholic and visionary leader of an organization resigns to "make some time for myself and the people in my life".
I wonder - is this a harbinger of sea-change at iStock?
That depends on who takes over and how this changes the iStock-Getty relationship.
I am surprised he hung on for as long as he did. So many take overs are followed by resignations, purges, etc.
He may have had a contractual obligation to stay on after the sale. It's just gone three years since the sale. Although they seemed to enjoy great independence, so I'm sure he still enjoyed himself (it certainly looked that way to me).
Yeah, if I remember correctly, he was bound to stay for 3 years, which I believe was up in February. He has a baby now. They tend to shift one's priorities.
-
Big day in microstock. The founder of the first and arguably still the most successful microstock agency, iStockphoto, has today announced his resignation.
Great news for Bruce - significant day for the industry - and a nervous day for everyone involved with iStock.
Here's the forum link: [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=86073[/url]
I'm pretty involved in iStock, and I'm not nervous.
I know the word 'culture' gets thrown around pretty loosely in regards to workplaces, but I can definitely say that our workplace has a culture. It's strong and vibrant and it's stayed with us. We've grown a lot over the last few years. There were twenty people in the office when I started. There are more than a hundred now. Throughout all that change and growth, the culture hasn't gone away. Our core team, people who have been together for years, will continue doing what we've always done. So I'm sad that I won't see my friend Bruce as often anymore, but I'm not nervous.
-
I don't think his leaving the company will make much of a difference to iStock, as everyones pointed out he was just serving his hand over period after the sale. From a buyers perspective his leaving makes no difference whatsoever, in fact I bet if you did a poll the vast majority of buyers wouldn't have a clue who he was anyway, that's not intended as an insult to him it's just that we as suppliers have more of an interest in who's running a company than the buyers do.
-
Big day in microstock. The founder of the first and arguably still the most successful microstock agency, iStockphoto, has today announced his resignation.
Great news for Bruce - significant day for the industry - and a nervous day for everyone involved with iStock.
Here's the forum link: [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=86073[/url]
I'm pretty involved in iStock, and I'm not nervous.
I know the word 'culture' gets thrown around pretty loosely in regards to workplaces, but I can definitely say that our workplace has a culture. It's strong and vibrant and it's stayed with us. We've grown a lot over the last few years. There were twenty people in the office when I started. There are more than a hundred now. Throughout all that change and growth, the culture hasn't gone away. Our core team, people who have been together for years, will continue doing what we've always done. So I'm sad that I won't see my friend Bruce as often anymore, but I'm not nervous.
That's good to hear. At the time of posting the above there was no confirmation that Kelly would take over. Other iStock insiders told me directly that they were nervous. Very nervous.
-
This makes sense and it happens all the time when companies are acquired. I'm to new to microstock t know how iStock changed in the last three years but I wouldn't say that it chnages a lot in the last few month and it doesn't seem like his resignation will result in more changes.
-
I'm pretty involved in iStock, and I'm not nervous.
I know the word 'culture' gets thrown around pretty loosely in regards to workplaces, but I can definitely say that our workplace has a culture. It's strong and vibrant and it's stayed with us. We've grown a lot over the last few years. There were twenty people in the office when I started. There are more than a hundred now. Throughout all that change and growth, the culture hasn't gone away. Our core team, people who have been together for years, will continue doing what we've always done. So I'm sad that I won't see my friend Bruce as often anymore, but I'm not nervous.
For so many of us iStock means so much! I am sad to see Bruce going but I totally understand his reasons and I respect it. I know iSotck will be in good hands and with people like Kelly, JJ and you rogermexico - to mention only a few from the crew- everything will be OK.
-
... it's just that we as suppliers have more of an interest in who's running a company than the buyers do.
Yep, as in "who will the next best match favor?", and "will the focus of the agency become even more inclusive, or less?", and "what will happen to the exclusive commission rates?".
-
He may have had a contractual obligation to stay on after the sale. It's just gone three years since the sale.
Exactly. I remember when the original annoucement was made that Getty was buying istock, Bruce said he was contracted to stay on as head of istock for 3 years.
I am certainly grateful for his vision and efforts in starting this industry. It has brought a lot of happiness to my life. I wish him the best.
It is a bit scary for the future of istock. Wonder if the rest of the long time admins will be staying on or if there will be more high level resignations.
ETA looks like everyone else intends to stay in place. That is definitely reassuring. :)
-
Good riddance...
-
I wonder if he's included in the 110 Getty employees who were asked to leave last week?
-
Big day in microstock. The founder of the first and arguably still the most successful microstock agency, iStockphoto, has today announced his resignation.
Great news for Bruce - significant day for the industry - and a nervous day for everyone involved with iStock.
Here's the forum link: [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=86073[/url]
I'm pretty involved in iStock, and I'm not nervous.
I know the word 'culture' gets thrown around pretty loosely in regards to workplaces, but I can definitely say that our workplace has a culture. It's strong and vibrant and it's stayed with us. We've grown a lot over the last few years. There were twenty people in the office when I started. There are more than a hundred now. Throughout all that change and growth, the culture hasn't gone away. Our core team, people who have been together for years, will continue doing what we've always done. So I'm sad that I won't see my friend Bruce as often anymore, but I'm not nervous.
I really like what you said Andrew. after a nervous few months, this adds to the feeling of concern. but, I also believe that the iStock culture is entrenched and has a life of its own at this point. it will continue to evolve, but in a direction I think most of us can in general look forward to. I can understand how it would be once ownership is given up...you would eventually want to move on. I would. should be interesting.
-
Bruce's decision has nothing to do with other recent shakeups at Getty. It's something he's been coming to for a while.
-
I don't think his decision would have anything to do with the Getty shake ups. Bruce was never 'just' an employee, and I think he deserves more credit than to insinuate that this was an impromptu decision. if he made decisions like that, iStock would not be what it is today. I think he has made an important and probably difficult decision. and he will be continuing on as a contributor, which I'm sure he has really missed.
-
I always find it hard to believe when the self-confessed workaholic and visionary leader of an organization resigns to "make some time for myself and the people in my life".
Maybe it is difficult to see something you created being managed differently from what you wanted. I feel that sometimes at work in a much less significant scale.
Regards,
Adelaide
-
I'm exclusive, I wasn't a bit nervous when Getty bougth istock, I'm not now. But yes a bit sad, because it was great to know that there was a nice and smart guy like him at the steer. Bruce had the microstock idea, and put the idea in motion; without him, probably even this forum wouldn't exist. But istock flies on his impulse, and will go on flying, I haven't the sligthlest doubt about it.
-
I'm exclusive, I wasn't a bit nervous when Getty bougth istock, I'm not now. But yes a bit sad, because it was great to know that there was a nice and smart guy like him at the steer. Bruce had the microstock idea, and put the idea in motion; without him, probably even this forum wouldn't exist. But istock flies on his impulse, and will go on flying, I haven't the sligthlest doubt about it.
I agree. He put together a really awesome team and most importantly, he did not micro-manage them. They are more than capable of continuing on without him, though of course he will be missed. For whatever problems someone might have with istock as a company, I have a hard time believing that anyone who actually had direct contact with him would say "good riddance". He took time, on more than one occasion, to answer emails from me ... a tiny little (bronze at the time) contributor in a sea of thousands of others. I've never forgotten that.
Anyway, I wish him well. I hope that iStock is none the worse for him leaving. I don't really expect any dramatic differences. It's not as if he was singlehandedly running the place.
-
Big day in microstock. The founder of the first and arguably still the most successful microstock agency, iStockphoto, has today announced his resignation.
Great news for Bruce - significant day for the industry - and a nervous day for everyone involved with iStock.
Here's the forum link: [url]http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=86073[/url]
I'm pretty involved in iStock, and I'm not nervous.
I know the word 'culture' gets thrown around pretty loosely in regards to workplaces, but I can definitely say that our workplace has a culture. It's strong and vibrant and it's stayed with us. We've grown a lot over the last few years. There were twenty people in the office when I started. There are more than a hundred now. Throughout all that change and growth, the culture hasn't gone away. Our core team, people who have been together for years, will continue doing what we've always done. So I'm sad that I won't see my friend Bruce as often anymore, but I'm not nervous.
That's good to hear. At the time of posting the above there was no confirmation that Kelly would take over. Other iStock insiders told me directly that they were nervous. Very nervous.
Okay I'll take the bait. Nervous about... what?
-
... it's just that we as suppliers have more of an interest in who's running a company than the buyers do.
Yep, as in "who will the next best match favor?", and "will the focus of the agency become even more inclusive, or less?", and "what will happen to the exclusive commission rates?".
Will they finally introduce exclusive image deals?
-
I think it's not strange thing to leave a company after you sold it. It's time to move on, start something new, develop yourself in new directions. If he feel times is there then go for it. He can be proud of himself that he builded such a big company, with a strong community around it.
I never met him in person, but think he is a great guy. So Bruce Good Luck and thanks for everything you've done for Istock
-
I am certainly grateful for his vision and efforts in starting this industry. It has brought a lot of happiness to my life.
I have often posted negatively about IS, the zeitgeist there rubs me the wrong way I guess.
But I would like to personally thank Bruce Livingston for what he has accomplished. The business model he created has changed the lives of thousands and thousands of people for the better, and I am one of them. What could be a greater accomplishment than to create such a wonderful opportunity for so many people, of every race, religion, and national origin all over the world? So I would like to say thanks, and wish him the best of luck in whatever comes next for him.
-
many of us have had one very similar experience.....every email I sent to Bruce came back with a thoughtful and personal reply. that he took the time to do that for contributors says volumes.
-
I think the people there could run the ship well. What depends is how Getty or should I say H & F want to get involved or not at this point. They have been smart in the past letting Bruce run this during the transition. Especially when their history shows taking over companies cleaning house, and running it their way. I hope that won't be the case this time. Especially for the Exclusives that helped build the company from day one. Heck even Getty is deflecting rumors of themselves going out of business or being sold by some inside reports. I am sure we will learn more as time passes. Hats off to Bruce, he is a visionary. Maybe his next plan will be even bigger for image makers.
Nero
-
On the one hand I want to say congrats to Bruce and I hope he enjoys the time he now has to spend with his family. But on the other hand, I know that guys like Bruce can't sit still for too long. He has a nice long break coming his way, but I highly doubt that this is the last we'll hear about Bruce Livingstone being at the helm of a company.
I never met Bruce myself, but I've had the opportunity to know people similar to him. The one common thread among these types of people is that no matter how successful they are, no matter how many millions they manage to make for themselves, they never stop going. They may say that they're retired, they're done, they want to relax and spend time with their wives/husbands/kids. Yet all of them get the itch to work again eventually. My college roommate sold a software company a couple years back for $12 million. He retired for 6 months before he launched another startup.
Don't be surprised when Bruce pops up in the news again some time soon, behind some new company, new industry, new idea, new venture...
-
All I have to say in this thread is "thank you" to Jon from Shutterstock for actually raising contributors commissions and making for an extremely easy upload process at ShutterStock.... two things I cannot say for Bruce Livingstones (sp?)
-
All I have to say in this thread is "thank you" to Jon from Shutterstock for actually raising contributors commissions and making for an extremely easy upload process at ShutterStock.... two things I cannot say for Bruce Livingstones (sp?)
So what percentage do we get with shutterstock then :)
-
All I have to say in this thread is "thank you" to Jon from Shutterstock for actually raising contributors commissions and making for an extremely easy upload process at ShutterStock.... two things I cannot say for Bruce Livingstones (sp?)
So what percentage do we get with shutterstock then :)
That is what I was thinking! We have no idea what commissions we are getting at Shutterstock. Shutterstock has raised their prices and amount we get, but so has iStock. I am guessing though that at Shutterstock we got a reduction in commissions the last couple years as they raised the package prices a larger % than they raised the commissions.
Additionally, and despite my grudge against iStock for their tight upload limits, horrible upload process, and measly 20% commissions, they very reliably have the highest return per image for the majority of non-exclusive photographers, myself included.
-
Additionally, and despite my grudge against iStock for their tight upload limits, horrible upload process, and measly 20% commissions, they very reliably have the highest return per image for the majority of non-exclusive photographers, myself included.
Is that a guess or a fact? My RPI for instance on DT and on SS is higher. I used to have a very high RPI on about 5 bestsellers on IS but since the last search algorithm makeover, they are drowned on page 30 with loads of spam on top, so income dropped to almost zero. That won't get any better since considering the idiot upload process, I can better go flip hamburgers than upload to IS.
-
All I have to say in this thread is "thank you" to Jon from Shutterstock for actually raising contributors commissions and making for an extremely easy upload process at ShutterStock.... two things I cannot say for Bruce Livingstones (sp?)
I can't argue about the upload process because it is indeed a lot easier at SS, however the raising commissions is just a smoke screen, they put their prices up and increase our amount per download but as a commission percentage I actually think it dropped last time, add to that the diminishing number of downloads a lot of people are experiencing due to the increase in number of images being accepted (drop of standards?) and for me personally SS is getting worse. The OD sales have increased but then the commission on those sales are not as much as a same size download on some other sites.
-
Additionally, and despite my grudge against iStock for their tight upload limits, horrible upload process, and measly 20% commissions, they very reliably have the highest return per image for the majority of non-exclusive photographers, myself included.
Is that a guess or a fact? My RPI for instance on DT and on SS is higher. I used to have a very high RPI on about 5 bestsellers on IS but since the last search algorithm makeover, they are drowned on page 30 with loads of spam on top, so income dropped to almost zero. That won't get any better since considering the idiot upload process, I can better go flip hamburgers than upload to IS.
Yes, I believe it is a fact. Here is a result from the 2008 microstock survey (http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/2008-microstock-photographers-survey-(the-results)/). From the top 4 sites and 204 non-exclusive photographers, 93 said iStock gave the highest RPI. Next in line was shutterstock with 65 photographers saying they got the highest RPI from them.
-
Yes, I believe it is a fact. .... From the top 4 sites and 204 non-exclusive photographers, 93 said iStock gave the highest RPI.
Yes, I read it in the other thread. I'm a methodology freak (probably a handicap left over from a previous job) but with 93 out of 204 = 46%, istock doesn't have the highest RPI for most, not even for the majority. Given a margin for a low confidence limit on a sample of just 204, you can safely say that istock gives the highest RPI for half the respondents.
I always loved statistics and the result raises some interesting questions, for instance the correlation between the reported RPI and portfolio size on every site. But that takes us too far, and the question wasn't in the survey.
-
yeah I also wanted to comment on RPI immediately too, but I thought this topic is about Bruce so I didn't :)
For me the RPI from iStock is definitely not the top one. Sometimes it's the second (with a large gap), more often it's the 3rd or even the 4th place.
-
Their image upload limits at Istock do play into the picture. SS might have a lower RPI but they allow you to upload a great deal more that easily offsets the returns per month that Istock brings. 50 images at Istock make you x amount but 500 at SS make you a great deal more at the end of the month. Unless you are Exclusive at Istock.
I wonder if they will pull the plug on upload limits and make other adjustments now Getty might be taking over. Time will tell if we see changes or if they stay the coarse. I hope for all Exclusives at Istock they keep things just the way they are.
-
One things for sure judging by some comments, a lot of people don't understand or have a different perspective on how RPI works.
-
One things for sure judging by some comments, a lot of people don't understand or have a different perspective on how RPI works.
RPI per month on a particular site is the total income for that month on the site, divided by the number of images online at the end of that month. Correct?
This measure should not be confounded with income/download which would be the same as RPI if all your shots were downloaded in the same amount. You can have a very high income/download but a low RPI if only 10% of your port sells well.
-
RPI per month on a particular site is the total income for that month on the site, divided by the number of images online at the end of that month. Correct?
This measure should not be confounded with income/download which would be the same as RPI if all your shots were downloaded in the same amount. You can have a very high income/download but a low RPI if only 10% of your port sells well.
Well your analogy is the basic and I'd imagine the one that most people use and probably based their results in the survey, however if you want to be really in depth about it then no there's other things to factor for a true RPI, for that you have to take into account production costs involved in producing that imagery including the time spent uploading.
-
Well your analogy is the basic and I'd imagine the one that most people use and probably based their results in the survey, however if you want to be really in depth about it then no there's other things to factor for a true RPI, for that you have to take into account production costs involved in producing that imagery including the time spent uploading
Yes of course, it's gross RPI. But comparing RPIs over sites, net RPI can be discarded since it belongs to an image, not to the site. If you define RPI as yield per specific image (over all sites), then you have to take costs into account to get the actual yield of course. Or rather all the images that belong to the same shoot and share the same costs.
I don't think most modest microstockers (like myself) want to do that since they only count their marginal costs. Those beautiful tropical beach shots are just a side product of a beach holiday they would have taken anyways. Or do an assignement and do some stock at the side, like on the end of the last film roll.
I guess if they would count the total production cost, included camera, space and equipment write-off, they would discover that they lose a lot on microstock. Some even buy a 20MP Canon D5MKII just for stock, when a < 1000$ D90 is good enough. You don't need a D5 for your holiday shots and your weddings. It could only be OK if your volume exceeds 1000-1500 new stockworthy accepted shots per year.
Since the vast majority of microstockers just counts their marginal costs and doesn't count their postprocessing/upload time, the professional stockers that have to count all their costs are at a very big disadvantage. The clever ones will need to do assignments, events, weddings etc... at the side to survive.
Masnick on Techdirt wrote about The Grand Unified Theory On The Economics Of Free (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070503/012939.shtml) in the music industry. Since digital music is in endless supply (like images) and the marginal cost is almost zero, those products will tend to be priced zero. A musician should make his income from side-effects that are scarce, like concerts, concert tickets, merchandise, backstage passes etc...
Applied to photography, you could argue that prices still will go down until they fall below the cost of even the cheapest production. A photographer can then only survive by his assignments, and use the prestige of being on stock as a marketing advantage against other local assignment photographers.
Finally, there is the often ignored aspect of globalization. I wrote about this 3 years ago on Talkmicro and most had to laugh. Just go to any site forum and look at the new contributors. Most are from Serbia, Ukraine, Russia, Croatia, Slovenia, Poland, and recently the Chinese started to pour in. Those are countries with a cost of living that is a fraction of that of the industrialized West, but they get the same price for their photos as Western photographers. The production cost of a shoot is much lower there and in the limit, they will dominate the scene. Devaluing the dollar is a great move from Obama, so the West-Europeans will be the first to go.
2 cents ;)
-
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/22/why-advertising-is-failing-on-the-internet/ (http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/22/why-advertising-is-failing-on-the-internet/) Same game different name.
-
Finally, there is the often ignored aspect of globalization. I wrote about this 3 years ago on Talkmicro and most had to laugh. Just go to any site forum and look at the new contributors. Most are from Serbia, Ukraine, Russia, Croatia, Slovenia, Poland, and recently the Chinese started to pour in. Those are countries with a cost of living that is a fraction of that of the industrialized West, but they get the same price for their photos as Western photographers. The production cost of a shoot is much lower there and in the limit, they will dominate the scene. Devaluing the dollar is a great move from Obama, so the West-Europeans will be the first to go.
Well it's a theory except you're forgetting something, the highest yielding type of imagery are those that feature people, the buyers at present don't want that many images with Chinese folk in, and the other countries you mentioned are all poor in comparison to the largest image buying countries, and without sounding patronising I could spot a Polish girl in a cheap looking outfit a mile off, so although they may be able to mass produce the images cheaper than the Western world a lot of them will look cheap which is not what sells. Fit, healthy well dressed people is what sells at the moment because it's what the buyers want representing their needs, there are those from the countries you mentioned that do produce the type of images that sell, and if you check I think you'll find they're no better off than anyone else if anything some are worse off because they need to pay more for quality goods in their countries than we do.
-
I could spot a Polish girl in a cheap looking outfit a mile off, so although they may be able to mass produce the images cheaper than the Western world a lot of them will look cheap which is not what sells.
Do you know Golbachov (http://www.dolgachov.com/)? Find the cheap Polish girl ;)
(http://dolgachov.com/abc/1.jpg)
And I'm sure the Western market rejects Asians!
(http://69.90.174.247/photos/display_pic_with_logo/230902/230902,1229794632,7.jpg)
-
Finally, there is the often ignored aspect of globalization. I wrote about this 3 years ago on Talkmicro and most had to laugh. Just go to any site forum and look at the new contributors. Most are from Serbia, Ukraine, Russia, Croatia, Slovenia, Poland, and recently the Chinese started to pour in. Those are countries with a cost of living that is a fraction of that of the industrialized West, but they get the same price for their photos as Western photographers. The production cost of a shoot is much lower there and in the limit, they will dominate the scene. Devaluing the dollar is a great move from Obama, so the West-Europeans will be the first to go.
Well it's a theory except you're forgetting something, the highest yielding type of imagery are those that feature people, the buyers at present don't want that many images with Chinese folk in, and the other countries you mentioned are all poor in comparison to the largest image buying countries, and without sounding patronising I could spot a Polish girl in a cheap looking outfit a mile off, so although they may be able to mass produce the images cheaper than the Western world a lot of them will look cheap which is not what sells. Fit, healthy well dressed people is what sells at the moment because it's what the buyers want representing their needs, there are those from the countries you mentioned that do produce the type of images that sell, and if you check I think you'll find they're no better off than anyone else if anything some are worse off because they need to pay more for quality goods in their countries than we do.
I agree, RT. Actually, if done wisaely it is cheaper to proce the kind of images the buyers want at the "Western World", than in the countries you quote. And I wouldn't call countries as Russia or Poland as something in the line of "third world", I've been in Eastern countries and life is not so cheap at all. Those are ideas from the past.
In the meantime, no mater how many now contributors or from where they came, my RPI and my istock income grows day after day.
-
Do you know Golbachov ([url]http://www.dolgachov.com/[/url])? Find the cheap Polish girl ;)
It's Dolgachov, and he's Estonian, not Polish.
A better example would have been to use Dash (http://www.dreamstime.com/dash_info).
These guys are the elites, though, which is not who RT was talking about.
-
Do you know Golbachov ([url]http://www.dolgachov.com/[/url])? Find the cheap Polish girl ;)
Yes I do read the last part of my post, you've highlighted exactly what I was trying to say, Lev works hard to find the models and get the right gear for the look he wants, he is not one of the 'new contributors who have started to pour in'.
And I'm sure the Western market rejects Asians!
I never said they rejected them, I said there wasn't same demand for them and there isn't, you show me one website/magazine/book with an image of an Asian person and I'll show you a thousand others that don't feature them.
-
why don't you guys start a new thread? talk about off topic.
as for cheap outsourcing, it's the way of globalization, which is the way things are going to go so why waste your breath debating it? same goes for the microstock world as anywhere else.
-
why don't you guys start a new thread? talk about off topic.
Since it came up here. That's how forums go, right? I didn't even hear of Bruce Who before since I don't visit the istock forums. My only communication with that 0.19c/image site is thru PayPal. I just discovered he's a heck of a fantastic photographer. Now you can have your thread back. Enjoy it. I'm out.
-
I think your thread is interesting, start it outside of here...
-
.nevermind.
-
Yes, I believe it is a fact. .... From the top 4 sites and 204 non-exclusive photographers, 93 said iStock gave the highest RPI.
Yes, I read it in the other thread. I'm a methodology freak (probably a handicap left over from a previous job) but with 93 out of 204 = 46%, istock doesn't have the highest RPI for most, not even for the majority. Given a margin for a low confidence limit on a sample of just 204, you can safely say that istock gives the highest RPI for half the respondents.
I always loved statistics and the result raises some interesting questions, for instance the correlation between the reported RPI and portfolio size on every site. But that takes us too far, and the question wasn't in the survey.
good point.. I would say we are getting technical but when talking about numbers and stats I suppose it is important :) You would be right, iStock does not have the majority, only the highest % of yes'
We don't have the RPI / vs portfolio size but we do have the vote for the 'best earning site' and in that question shutterstock was a clear winner.
-
I'm exclusive, I wasn't a bit nervous when Getty bougth istock, I'm not now. But yes a bit sad, because it was great to know that there was a nice and smart guy like him at the steer. Bruce had the microstock idea, and put the idea in motion; without him, probably even this forum wouldn't exist. But istock flies on his impulse, and will go on flying, I haven't the sligthlest doubt about it.
I agree. He put together a really awesome team and most importantly, he did not micro-manage them. They are more than capable of continuing on without him, though of course he will be missed. For whatever problems someone might have with istock as a company, I have a hard time believing that anyone who actually had direct contact with him would say "good riddance". He took time, on more than one occasion, to answer emails from me ... a tiny little (bronze at the time) contributor in a sea of thousands of others. I've never forgotten that.
Anyway, I wish him well. I hope that iStock is none the worse for him leaving. I don't really expect any dramatic differences. It's not as if he was singlehandedly running the place.
I agree... I'm very much thankful for his great work. I'm so blessed to be part of istockphoto community. I wish Bruce a happy life coz he deserves too.
-
wow. this is news indeed. but i guess it is inevitable from the day he sold istock to Getty. Its a matter of time but i salute him for his foresight and what he created with istock!