Friday's RC target announcement and iStock's strategy behind it

Slovenian

« Reply #300 on: June 09, 2011, 14:46 »

#link

Quote from: lisafx on June 09, 2011, 13:56

I am sure the sites that are screwing us are just delighted to see how we have very obligingly turned on each other, rather than directing our anger where it justifiably belongs. Divide and conquer.

Exactly!


	Logged

lisafx

Premium Member

« Reply #301 on: June 09, 2011, 14:47 »

#link

Quote from: cclapper on June 09, 2011, 14:13

And by the way, I haven't "turned" on anyone, and I don't see any "division". The only conquering I see going on is by the agencies over the contributors, exactly as it has been for the past few months. I actually thought you and I were in the same camp. Has that changed?

What word would you use when someone can do something positive but doesn't because it's easier to sit back, keep things as they are, and just go with the flow, even when it means they are on a downhill slide? If lazy is too harsh, maybe another word fits?

Absolutely we are still in the same camp. Most of us in this forum are. Which is exactly my point. The "lazy" label doesn't apply to most people here.

I hate to see us starting to fight amongst ourselves. Sorry if my post came off as too critical or aggressive. You and Cory are two people who definitely ARE doing something about it and I have a lot of respect for you both


« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 14:52 by lisafx »	Ignore \| Logged

cclapper

Premium Member

« Reply #302 on: June 09, 2011, 14:55 »

#link

Quote from: lisafx on June 09, 2011, 14:47

Quote from: cclapper on June 09, 2011, 14:13

Of course we are still in the same camp. Most of us in this forum are. Which is exactly my point. The "lazy" label doesn't apply to most people here.

Most of us, yes. All of us? No.

And for what it is worth...I fall into the lazy category myself sometimes. There's plenty more I could be doing, that's for sure.


	Ignore \| Logged

Buzbuzzer

« Reply #303 on: June 09, 2011, 18:27 »

#link

Quote from: Balmoral on June 09, 2011, 05:44

Quote from: sharpshot on June 09, 2011, 04:58

Quote from: sjlocke on June 09, 2011, 03:35

The problem is, most realize, or think, that such an alliance really would have no "power". It isn't like a union where stopping work for a few days accomplishes something. The stuff is still there to sell.

I agree but there might be some positive things we could do to promote sites that pay a fair commission and have good prices for buyers. I know that might not interest istock exclusives.

I think the best thing we can do is start a huge agency ourselves where we the Contributors are the shareholders and pay good commissions like 70 %
We have enough people among us with all sorts of qualities and expertise to make this work.
Then we the contributors are in control.

I think it's now possible...


	Ignore \| Logged

RacePhoto

« Reply #304 on: June 09, 2011, 18:40 »

#link

Well the lazy label does apply to one person I know and it's me. Or maybe it's I give up and don't give a darn anymore? Not just IS, but BigStock and the rest, I just lost interest.

I don't have a clue what the RC target means, or what the P+ program is all about. I get a minimal 15% for being and independent who has just under 300 images on IS. Every month they flip a switch or change something, and make it more difficult to understand all the pricing, commissions, programs and new rules.

Last time I wrote to Scout because my latest images were refused for No EXIF no one replied. Unless of course it takes three weeks for them to figure out a scan never has EXIF data?

What's the use?

Quote from: lisafx on June 09, 2011, 14:47

Quote from: cclapper on June 09, 2011, 14:13


	Ignore \| Logged

dehooks

« Reply #305 on: June 09, 2011, 18:40 »

#link

Quote from: lisafx on June 09, 2011, 12:52

Quote from: Slovenian on June 09, 2011, 07:13

So that some can feel better about themselves, above others (that's why aeonf is defending it all the time), but what's it really all about is of course for the agency to get a bigger cut and try to have their contributors by the ball$, terrorizing them to upload more (psychological pressure, not really rewarding as they'd like to show it to be)

Absolutely! This RC business was never about motivating or rewarding better, harder working contributors. It has always been a cash grab for the company. That's all it is. Can't believe there's anyone who still doubts that.

So true! It's not a reward system at all. If a majority of contributors showed an increase in their RC levels for a particular year, how would they be rewarded? With a higher target for the following year!


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #306 on: June 09, 2011, 19:39 »

#link

Quote from: RacePhoto on June 09, 2011, 18:40

Last time I wrote to Scout because my latest images were refused for No EXIF no one replied. Unless of course it takes three weeks for them to figure out a scan never has EXIF data?

How long did you wait? I've got an open Scout ticket since Mid-February.


	Ignore \| Logged

traveler1116

« Reply #307 on: June 09, 2011, 20:39 »

#link

Quote from: ShadySue on June 09, 2011, 19:39

Quote from: RacePhoto on June 09, 2011, 18:40

Last time I wrote to Scout because my latest images were refused for No EXIF no one replied. Unless of course it takes three weeks for them to figure out a scan never has EXIF data?

How long did you wait? I've got an open Scout ticket since Mid-February.

Got me beat mine is only from March.


	Ignore \| Logged

PaulieWalnuts

« Reply #308 on: June 09, 2011, 20:44 »

#link

Quote from: cclapper on June 09, 2011, 13:12

<snip>Contributors just keep getting shlt on...

There is a simple solution for those who don't like being shlt on. Move out of the way.

Quote from: cclapper on June 09, 2011, 13:12

Just a bunch of sheeple. Roll Eyes

Bah-ah-ah-ah-ah-ah


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #309 on: June 10, 2011, 04:47 »

#link

Quote from: traveler1116 on June 09, 2011, 20:39

Quote from: ShadySue on June 09, 2011, 19:39

Quote from: RacePhoto on June 09, 2011, 18:40

Last time I wrote to Scout because my latest images were refused for No EXIF no one replied. Unless of course it takes three weeks for them to figure out a scan never has EXIF data?

How long did you wait? I've got an open Scout ticket since Mid-February.

Got me beat mine is only from March.

I've got two from 13th March still showing in open tickets; the Feb one has fallen off the cliff. At the beginning I was getting editorial rejections that didn't make sense to me. Now I'm not even bothering to Scout them (in three years I doubt if I Scouted ten files; since Editorial, I've got well over 10 I'd like to Scout). They win again. Angry


	Ignore \| Logged

Mantis

Premium Member

« Reply #310 on: June 10, 2011, 19:21 »

#link

Another bute from LOBO http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1


	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #311 on: June 10, 2011, 19:54 »

#link

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 19:21

Another bute from LOBO http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1

Totally insensitive from someone whose salary derives from the contributors he enjoys putting down, but which presumably doesn't fluctuate with the whims of the best match, or reduce because of the policies of the company which is supposed to be representing his interests


	Ignore \| Logged

Mantis

Premium Member

« Reply #312 on: June 10, 2011, 20:04 »

#link

Quote from: ShadySue on June 10, 2011, 19:54

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 19:21

Another bute from LOBO http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1

I'm a pretty fair and decent person but if he worked for me I would have him in my office for a short discussion, and his response in retrospect would have been quite different. He needs to represent the qualities of the Istock brand, regardless of who touches the process...and he dilutes, in my opinion, brand equity (not that they have much left).


« Last Edit: June 10, 2011, 20:06 by Mantis »	Ignore \| Logged

ShadySue

Premium Member

« Reply #313 on: June 10, 2011, 20:10 »

#link

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 20:04

Quote from: ShadySue on June 10, 2011, 19:54

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 19:21

Another bute from LOBO http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1

I suspect that he does represent very well the iStock brand of 2010/11. For better or worse.


	Ignore \| Logged

Mantis

Premium Member

« Reply #314 on: June 10, 2011, 20:14 »

#link

Quote from: ShadySue on June 10, 2011, 20:10

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 20:04

Quote from: ShadySue on June 10, 2011, 19:54

Quote from: Mantis on June 10, 2011, 19:21

Another bute from LOBO http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=330440&page=1

I suspect that he does represent very well the iStock brand of 2010/11. For better or worse.

Okay, true. You got me there.


	Ignore \| Logged

dehooks

« Reply #315 on: June 10, 2011, 23:00 »

#link

Wow. I used to think that Lobo was a vast improvement over Peebert. Not anymore.


	Ignore \| Logged

Slovenian

« Reply #316 on: June 11, 2011, 03:05 »

#link

I suspect he's been bullied his whole life, he was out of lunch money every day in school, he probably was a lonely nerd nobody cared about, the laughing stock of the class, getting wedgies from the yard tree every day and now he's going all out since he's "in power". But in real life he's probably as pathetic as he ever was, perhaps money bought him a girlfriend and staff at IS pretends they're his friends.


	Logged

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13]

« previous next »

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Topic: Friday's RC target announcement and iStock's strategy behind it

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results