Nav: Home
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2012, 07:22

Login with username, password and session length

MicrostockGroup

MicrostockGroup » Forum » Top Tier - Big 4 » iStockPhoto.com » Have some of Istock top Contributers been individually contacted?

Microstockgroup Sponsors

Pond5 Deposit Photos

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print

Topic: Have some of Istock top Contributers been individually contacted?  

(Read 2371 times)
Freedom


« Reply #25 on: September 11, 2010, 13:16 »
This is not true.

Quote from: whatalife on September 11, 2010, 09:47
Remember that there is also a separate forum for exclusives, where I'd imagine there is quite a bit of discussion going on, hidden from public view where it may be more damaging (though I can't imagine what could be more damaging than some of the things already being said in public.)


Ignore | Logged

DepositPhotos.com
lisafx


Premium Member
« Reply #26 on: September 11, 2010, 14:17 »
I did get a call from IS administration on Tuesday, before the "stuff" hit the fan.  In fact, it was that call that alerted me to what was happening.  

The person who called me was an admin I have dealt with in the past and have some sense of relationship and familiarity with.  They seemed actually a bit embarrassed and apologetic about what's happening.  They offered to answer questions and clarify the situation.  But they made it very, very clear that this is set in stone, no wiggle room, no special deals.  I believed it because they were very clear on that point.

Frankly, I felt bad for this admin, and others who are left having to defend these decisions that so clearly do not come from there, or anyone at Calgary.  I don't feel resentment toward them at all.  This is a tough job market and they must be under a lot of pressure to tow the company line.  

Edited to clarify, no actual apologies were made.  I interpreted the embarrassment and apologetic nature of the call from their tone of voice and general demeanor.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 14:41 by lisafx »

Ignore | Logged

Vonkara



« Reply #27 on: September 11, 2010, 14:31 »
^ Very nice story Lisa. Now I believe it's more a Getty decision than a Istock one. I may be wrong, but it sound like


Ignore | Logged

iclick


« Reply #28 on: September 11, 2010, 14:36 »
Thank you for sharing Lisa


Ignore | Logged

ShadySue


Premium Member

iStock Gauge
« Reply #29 on: September 11, 2010, 14:53 »
Quote from: Freedom on September 11, 2010, 13:16
This is not true.

Quote from: whatalife on September 11, 2010, 09:47
Remember that there is also a separate forum for exclusives, where I'd imagine there is quite a bit of discussion going on, hidden from public view where it may be more damaging (though I can't imagine what could be more damaging than some of the things already being said in public.)
Well it is true that there is an exclusive forum, but these issues aren't being discussed in there. The only mention of it has been eleven posts in a thread speculating about the agency collection.


Ignore | Logged

dgilder

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #30 on: September 11, 2010, 15:26 »
I am not a top contributor, I'm only putting ~$1,800 a month into their pockets after they give me my current slice.  What I am is a person who signed back up under their false pretense of locking in a 40% royalty next year (when I should reach diamond).  I would have appreciated some kind of contact to discuss this, but never heard a peep.


Ignore | Logged

Pixel-Pizzazz

Dreamstime Gauge
« Reply #31 on: September 11, 2010, 19:25 »
All I can say is, it's weird how much free (over the top even) speech is being allowed in the forums since this started, until I exposed a nerve by responding to someone, when I suggested they "ask for the 'window' to be closed", if they don't want the 'neighbors' to 'hear'. Truly baffling.
« Last Edit: September 11, 2010, 19:32 by Pixel-Pizzazz »

Ignore | Logged

jsnover


Premium Member

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #32 on: September 11, 2010, 19:51 »
Quote from: dgilder on September 11, 2010, 15:26
I am not a top contributor, I'm only putting ~$1,800 a month into their pockets after they give me my current slice.  What I am is a person who signed back up under their false pretense of locking in a 40% royalty next year (when I should reach diamond).  I would have appreciated some kind of contact to discuss this, but never heard a peep.
Likewise, I'm not a top contributor either. I expected to turn diamond later this year - i.e. move to a 40% royalty. That won't be happenining for  2011 though. What they said last December about grandfathering was hollow blather. They should be ashamed, but apparently aren't. I'll probably stick around through the end of the year and then decide. The words about revisiting the rates if their predictions don't pan out are worth as much as last December's promises -i.e. nothing

None of this is a surprise given Getty's track record, but it's sad nevertheless. 


Ignore | Logged

jamirae


Premium Member

Dreamstime GaugeiStock Gauge
« Reply #33 on: September 11, 2010, 21:16 »
I'm not a top contributor, and am in the same boat with regards to the fact that I was looking forward to moving up to diamond before the end of the year and getting 40%.  As it stands now I am seriously considering going Independent.  I was sick to my stomach when they announced the canister changes and thought I'd never reach diamond, then they made the "grandfather" provision. Now this news and the whole canister thing is pointless.  I really feel betrayed, to be honest with you.  I was naive to believe that loyalty meant something.  I realize it's a business and they have to make money.  Well, I need to do the same and I know that I won't be part of the Agency collection and I can't seem to figure out what the formula is to get into Vetta, so my "redeemed credits" won't be hitting close to the mark to even maintain my current status. 

Those who are in Vetta and the 'Agency' collection will be getting higher redeemed credits.  It's pretty clear that these are the people that iStock wants to cultivate.  the rest us are good base income for them, but nothing special. 


Ignore | Logged

Envateo Photo ToolsMicrostock Insider
Pages: 1 [2] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
istock down!?
iStockPhoto.com 		leaf 2 2477 Last post July 25, 2006, 06:12
by leaf
iStock Stats - Where iStock ranks in Traffic, Files, Royalties & More
iStockPhoto.com 		amanda1863 5 4537 Last post August 22, 2006, 15:49
by amanda1863
Contacted by an Istock customer. Price... « 1 2 3 4 »
iStockPhoto.com 		Magnum 96 9589 Last post July 12, 2010, 15:45
by Magnum
Contacted by a Flickr-er
Newbie Discussion 		waseefakhtar 9 1729 Last post August 08, 2010, 06:35
by waseefakhtar
Just been contacted by two sites
General Stock Discussion 		nicemonkey 6 739 Last post September 30, 2011, 12:05
by Sadstock

Microstockgroup Sponsors

CanstockPhoto



MicrostockGroup Email Updates

Microstock Poll Results

Site Earnings Rating
Top Tier - Big 4
Shutterstock 100 arrow
iStock 66.7 arrow
Fotolia 34.9 arrow
Dreamstime 26.7 arrow
Middle Tier
DepositPhotos 21.6 arrow
123RF 16.3 arrow
Canstockphoto 11.2 arrow
Bigstockphoto 9.5 arrow
Veer 8.7 arrow
Low Earners
PantherMedia 6.7 arrow
PhotoDune 5.8 arrow
isignstock 4.1 arrow
Zoonar 3.5 arrow
GLStockImages 2.7 arrow
Stockfresh 2.2 arrow
YayMicro 1.8 arrow
FeaturePics 1.4 arrow
MostPhotos 1.3 arrow
ScanStockPhoto 1.1 arrow
Crestock 0.8 arrow
Cutcaster 0.6 arrow
AllYouCanStock 0.1 arrow
ClipartOf
Pond5
RevoStock
Clipcanvas
DrawShop
ClipDealer
PhotoSpin
VectorStock
GraphicRiver
Pixmac
PhotoCase
The3dStudio
photaki
SuperHug
PhotoKore
iRockStock
Vivozoom
StockPhotoMedia
Regimages
ImageVortex
Imagegate
ViscoImages
More Poll Results
Updated: 2012-05-26

TinyPortal v1.0.5 beta 1© Bloc
Advertise on Microstockgroup.com | Contact: [email protected]
Sitemap | Powered by SMF 1.1.15 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Adagio design by Bloc