pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Layoffs at istock  (Read 43461 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #375 on: January 20, 2012, 09:00 »
0
I have searched in vain to find more than rumors about rumors about rumors.   The analysis of some seems rather far reaching.  I see JJ is leaving, but his statement does not seem to be cause for alarm, in fact quite the contrary.  I am not saying there is no problem, but must the sky always be falling each time something changes?  Along with all of you, it has always seemed like poor policy on the part of iStock to  remain quiet so long during times of change, they have to see how the rumors explode and unsettle those trying to pay attention.  Sorry for my outburst, I need to take another monthly sabbatical from the forums.


Try searching a bit harder: http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2140045/jobs-shed-getty-images-absorbs-istockphoto

"We are completing the process of full functional integration across the two brands," says Getty Images' co-founder and CEO Jonathan Klein.... while confirming 30 redundancies at iStock (not at Getty) and then needlessly mentioning that they are not going to shut up shop at Calgary (which might suggest it is something he has been thinking about doing - there's a new rumour for you).

Fact 1: 30 staff, estimated at between 15% and 30% of the entire staff being fired
Fact 2: Senior management figures KT and JJRD among those fired
Fact 3: Sackings declared by Getty chief to be part of an "integration process" with Getty
Fact 4: "Integration" involves downsizing iStock, not Getty, making it plain iStock is being "integrated" into Getty, not the other way round.
Fact 5: Earlier part of integration process involved pushing low-grade Getty collections into iS at high price points and pushing most of iStock's collection into other Getty subsidiaries, TS and PP
Fact 6: Istock was stripped first of its CEO then of its COO and now of whatever JJRD is. The CEO job is considered too insignificant to merit a full-time in-house boss, instead it is made part of the duties of a Gettyimages employee.
Fact 7: (I almost missed this one) according to Klein's statement, iStock is no longer thought of as a company, it is regarded as a Getty "brand" (see his quote above).

From being a self-contained, self-governing, stand-alone unit, as Bruce Livingstone was promised it would remain when he sold it, it has become one of "the Gettyimages collections" and Calgary has become a Getty branch office rather than the headquarters of a company.

But you're right. The sky has not fallen in. People will continue to buy and sell image licences at iStockphoto and the name will remain a proud part of the Gettyimages group, alongside the other famous collections. Tony Stone, the Bettmann Archive etc.

However, while the marketing, quality control and accounting functions may remain in Calgary, the financial control, strategic planning and budgeting will be done in Seattle, where due consideration will need to be given to the competing demands of other active collections, such as TS, Photos.com and, of course, the main Gettyimages collection. That is what "integration" is about.

So it is still iStock, Captain, it's just not iStock as we knew it.  


This is an excellent summary.  Nice job.


« Reply #376 on: January 20, 2012, 09:22 »
0
Thanks for the update.  I found the article you linked to about one hour after my post.  So much for my half thought out reply with far less than half the available information.
Now to the subject at hand.  I will be interested to follow the progress of this recent development.  I am still uploading but not with as much enthusiasm as before. 
I have my own small business that is suffering as of late and have some serious and difficult changes to make that will upset some staff.  I am on both sides of this issue right now.  I hope I can learn about communication from iStocks negative example and do better in the coming weeks with my other problem.

« Reply #377 on: January 20, 2012, 09:48 »
0
However, while the marketing, quality control and accounting functions may remain in Calgary ...

I presume JJRD's position as Director of Content (or whatever it was) has been made redundant which suggests to me that the inspection side of Istock might be moving to Getty. I could imagine that the concept of having 100-odd partially-employed 'inspectors' dotted around the globe to be quite alien to Rebbecca who does not come from a microstock background. Maybe she will out-source it to Romania instead.

All those Admin 'staff', operating from their homes, might be let go too (I've never really understood how that side of things could work efficiently). Rebbecca might not like the way they operate either.

« Reply #378 on: January 20, 2012, 12:18 »
0
However, while the marketing, quality control and accounting functions may remain in Calgary ...

I presume JJRD's position as Director of Content (or whatever it was) has been made redundant which suggests to me that the inspection side of Istock might be moving to Getty. I could imagine that the concept of having 100-odd partially-employed 'inspectors' dotted around the globe to be quite alien to Rebbecca who does not come from a microstock background. Maybe she will out-source it to Romania instead.

All those Admin 'staff', operating from their homes, might be let go too (I've never really understood how that side of things could work efficiently). Rebbecca might not like the way they operate either.

Maybe that has happened already.  Inspections are really speedy now, and vetta/agency nomination go though at the same speed. Those nominated files used to take 3-7 days longer now they don't.

ETA recently accepted agency are all established agency artist.  I am guessing it is more of the same for a chosen few.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2012, 12:23 by hiddenstock »

« Reply #379 on: January 20, 2012, 13:28 »
0

« Reply #380 on: January 20, 2012, 13:44 »
0
HQ has posted an explanation to the changes

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339877&page=1


^^^ More management-speak fluff. Did anyone learn anything from it (apart from "Everything's going to be great!")?

« Reply #381 on: January 20, 2012, 13:45 »
0
HQ has posted an explanation to the changes

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339877&page=1


^^^ More management-speak fluff. Did anyone learn anything from it (apart from "Everything's going to be great!")?


They decided to replace a charismatic leader, an iStock mascot, with a committee. Great decision! :D

« Reply #382 on: January 20, 2012, 13:47 »
0
nothing exciting there actually, I was looking for another cut

ShadySue

« Reply #383 on: January 20, 2012, 13:50 »
0
nothing exciting there actually, I was looking for another cut
I don't look for, or get excited by, cuts. I worry about them.  :o

« Reply #384 on: January 20, 2012, 13:51 »
0

« Reply #385 on: January 20, 2012, 13:52 »
0
HQ has posted an explanation to the changes

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339877&page=1


^^^ More management-speak fluff. Did anyone learn anything from it (apart from "Everything's going to be great!")?


They decided to replace a charismatic leader, an iStock mascot, with a committee. Great decision! :D


I don't like it either, feels like we are getting info from a little guy behind the curtain with the "HQ" post. Seems on body wants to stand up and lead IS.
I also don't like the answers coming from Lobo. I understand his job as moderator, but not here. We should be hearing from someone in charge at IS not a forum moderator.

traveler1116

« Reply #386 on: January 20, 2012, 13:55 »
0
HQ has posted an explanation to the changes

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=339877&page=1


^^^ More management-speak fluff. Did anyone learn anything from it (apart from "Everything's going to be great!")?


They decided to replace a charismatic leader, an iStock mascot, with a committee. Great decision! :D


I don't like it either, feels like we are getting info from a little guy behind the curtain with the "HQ" post. Seems on body wants to stand up and lead IS.
I also don't like the answers coming from Lobo. I understand his job as moderator, but not here. We should be hearing from someone in charge at IS not a forum moderator.

I agree.  While the answers he's giving are reassuring I don't think he is being told very much at all so it's difficult to put much weight on them.

« Reply #387 on: January 20, 2012, 13:59 »
0
^ I have a hard time taking someone, who at times comes across so condescending, seriously.  It makes it look like he is in charge. 

« Reply #388 on: January 20, 2012, 13:59 »
0
I think it is sad that they feel the need to hide behind the istockHQ moniker.

The competition all have CEOs that put their names out on the internet. So does every other successful internet based company. Can you imagine Mark Zuckerberg hiding behind a faceless alias?

Who is in charge of istock? Who is the captain on the bridge? Who feels responsible for success or failure?

We will see what is coming, but this text is extremly disappointing.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2012, 14:01 by cobalt »

ShadySue

« Reply #389 on: January 20, 2012, 13:59 »
0
I also don't like the answers coming from Lobo. I understand his job as moderator, but not here. We should be hearing from someone in charge at IS not a forum moderator.
He's admitting his posts have no real currency, by prefacing them with "From what I understand ..." and "At this point I don't suspect ..." and "the answer as I understand it".

And as always, the 'debated interpretation' of the obfuscatory OP has started.
JJ may be going, but his legacy may have a long shadow.

« Reply #390 on: January 20, 2012, 14:08 »
0

I've never met the legend that is jjrd so have failed to fall under his gallic charms but found his impenetrable ramblings and his coterie of familiar faces in all the 'lypse reports as divisive and demotivating as the getty dictated changes.

You actually managed to get me chuckling in the midst of all this doom and gloom.

Ditto  :D

And great summary, Baldrick.

« Reply #391 on: January 20, 2012, 14:14 »
0
Agree with gostwyck that today's announcement is corporate blah blah with no real meaning.

@cobalt. In the iStock thread you mentioned concern over Getty editors making choices over where content goes. i think that's a real concern. I have two brothers who submitted music to Pump Audio prior to the time Getty bought it. It had done well for them. After Getty bought it things went OK for a while but recently they wondered what happened to their new submissions as they couldn't find them at Pump Audio. Contacting Getty about this they were told that Getty decided they'd be best at iStock - where they haven't sold at all. So their old stuff at Pump still sells but they can't get new stuff there.

It certainly seems clear that the new regime doesn't plan to have a visible presence - and a name - in the iStock forums. They won't even put a name out there - I'd love to see a post from this he/she who will not be named HQ account on the importance of the iStock community :)

« Reply #392 on: January 20, 2012, 14:17 »
0
Who is in charge of istock? Who is the captain on the bridge?

Judging by the way sales have been leaking it might as well be Francesco Schettino.

« Reply #393 on: January 20, 2012, 14:19 »
0
Agree with gostwyck that today's announcement is corporate blah blah with no real meaning.

It certainly seems clear that the new regime doesn't plan to have a visible presence - and a name - in the iStock forums. They won't even put a name out there - I'd love to see a post from this he/she who will not be named HQ account on the importance of the iStock community :)

All that today's announcement means is that they plan to pump us with fluff to keep things as quiet as possible. And very smooth corporate move to hide behind a moniker. Much harder to rage against iStockHQ than it was to lambast JJ, KK, etc.

« Reply #394 on: January 20, 2012, 14:21 »
0
Who is in charge of istock? Who is the captain on the bridge?

Judging by the way sales have been leaking it might as well be Francesco Schettino.

We'll know for sure when the stories of falling into the lifeboat start to surface :)

And so who plays the part of the infuriated Italian coast guard official telling that world-class-sleazeball to get the eff back on the ship?!

« Reply #395 on: January 20, 2012, 14:34 »
0


And so who plays the part of the infuriated Italian coast guard official telling that world-class-sleazeball to get the eff back on the ship?!

Gostwyk - a shoe in for that role

« Reply #396 on: January 20, 2012, 14:44 »
0
Who is in charge of istock? Who is the captain on the bridge?

Judging by the way sales have been leaking it might as well be Francesco Schettino.

We'll know for sure when the stories of falling into the lifeboat start to surface :)

And so who plays the part of the infuriated Italian coast guard official telling that world-class-sleazeball to get the eff back on the ship?!

Now, now, guys and girls, don't be morons! For people with feelers out for corporate shenanigans, you're far too quick to concur in the condemnation of a "useful idiot". If you had bothered to calculate the number of days, months and years between the sinking of the Titanic and the Italian tragedy, you'd be far less certain it was an accident. Take more care!

« Reply #397 on: January 20, 2012, 15:00 »
0
Often, after some tragedy like the Italian cruise ship grounding, an enjoyable story is quickly spun up by the media;  and long after the fact - years, sometimes- we find out it didn't happen like that at all.  The media wants conflict and tragedy, heros and villians.

I've already read that the captain didn't exactly 'trip and fall' into a lifeboat - he landed in one when the ship's deck tilted to 70 degrees and he slid off the deck.   

« Reply #398 on: January 20, 2012, 15:12 »
0
Agree with gostwyck that today's announcement is corporate blah blah with no real meaning.

It sure is giving Lobo plenty of reason to be his usual unpleasant self. Can't he get fired so we can have a less hostile forum experience over there....?

« Reply #399 on: January 20, 2012, 15:14 »
0
I've already read that the captain didn't exactly 'trip and fall' into a lifeboat - he landed in one when the ship's deck tilted to 70 degrees and he slid off the deck.   

I wonder what the chances of *that* are, and if other people had as fortuitous a sliding. :D


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
5 Replies
6724 Views
Last post August 22, 2006, 15:49
by amanda1863
5 Replies
3178 Views
Last post September 12, 2007, 13:08
by michaeldb
17 Replies
4415 Views
Last post February 10, 2008, 15:51
by sharply_done
Corbis layoffs

Started by jsnover « 1 2  All » SnapVillage.com

27 Replies
9602 Views
Last post September 24, 2008, 17:16
by louoates
0 Replies
587 Views
Last post January 18, 2012, 17:21
by gaja

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors