Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2012, 07:10

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

Microstockgroup Sponsors


« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] Print

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

(Read 15056 times)
Slovenian


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

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


DepositPhotos.com
lisafx
« Reply #301 on: June 09, 2011, 14:47 »


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 Smiley
« Last Edit: June 09, 2011, 14:52 by lisafx »

Ignore | Logged


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


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?

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


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

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 »

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?  Smiley

What's the use?



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 Smiley


Ignore | Logged


dehooks

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


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

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?  Smiley
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 »

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?  Smiley
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


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


<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.

Just a bunch of sheeple.  Roll Eyes

Bah-ah-ah-ah-ah-ah


Ignore | Logged


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

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

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


Ignore | Logged


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


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


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


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


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


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).

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


Ignore | Logged


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


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


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).

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

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

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 »

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


Microstock InsiderEnvateo Photo Tools
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12 [13] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
Istock Announcement « 1 2 3 4 »
iStockPhoto.com
ptlee 98 11284 Last post September 23, 2006, 07:38
by Quevaal
Power in Santa Cruz has been erratic since the storm on Friday
Featurepics.com
Elena 3 1063 Last post January 17, 2008, 23:34
by Elena
NEWS - Image of the Day: Friday August 1st
SnapVillage.com
News Feed 0 662 Last post August 01, 2008, 09:45
by News Feed
iStock delaying PayPal til Friday « 1 2 »
iStockPhoto.com
jsnover 37 2419 Last post October 12, 2010, 19:42
by cclapper
It's Friday! Friday! Fun Fun Fun - LOL « 1 2 »
Off Topic
leaf 46 3073 Last post March 28, 2011, 12:39
by packerguy

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc