MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 02:20
-
Holy cow! I just heard a news flash! The worlds biggest AD-agency, with 6000 employees, worldwide, Saatch&Saatchi, is pondering about setting up their own photo-agency, they are apparently sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment and have to spend millions in hiring photogrpahers.
These type of people REALLY know how to run things, take my word for it! if true Im off to them like a shot, even if it means exclusivity.
-
I'd like a fresh start with a good agency as well, not to compete against 15 million images from day one (or to none, but don't earn sheat since they have no traffic anyway). So I might have a chance of earning some serious cash for a change :)
-
I'm not sure it's the 'news flash' you make it out to be, I heard the same thing a few years ago and nothing came of it, they may be the biggest ad agency in the world but the 'prospect' of them opening a stock site certainly isn't something I'm going to get all excited about.
They spend millions on hiring photographers because they create bespoke advertising campaigns on behalf of top clients, those clients don't and in most cases couldn't use stock photos.
Every single ad agency in the world moans about the 'low quality' being offered on stock sites, translated all that means is they couldn't find a stock photo that fits the campaign the way they want it to.
-
I'm not sure it's the 'news flash' you make it out to be, I heard the same thing a few years ago and nothing came of it, they may be the biggest ad agency in the world but the 'prospect' of them opening a stock site certainly isn't something I'm going to get all excited about.
They spend millions on hiring photographers because they create bespoke advertising campaigns on behalf of top clients, those clients don't and in most cases couldn't use stock photos.
Every single ad agency in the world moans about the 'low quality' being offered on stock sites, translated all that means is they couldn't find a stock photo that fits the campaign the way they want it to.
I did dozens of jobs for Saatchis during the 90s, until I moved back to Sweden. They still have an enormous amount of corporate accounts, billings, etc, not just the heavy duty stuff. The only thing Im not sure of is if its Saatchis? before it dissapeared it said "biggest AD-Agency in the world. Well the British Saatchis, has been the biggest for the last 40 years, in billings that is but as far as turnover is concerned it could be O&M or Greys? although iuf its true, I hope its Saatchis. Nice people, well, at least they were nice people.
-
And, of course, you know who the CEO of Saatchi Online is, right?
http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24 (http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24)
http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/ (http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/)
-
Can you please explain just how this might in any way be the "biggest site in the world"?
An initial question, If they are "sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment" why would they, at not inconsiderable cost, set up an agency to share "higher quality" with the rest of the world?
What a great site this is for tea break humour !
-
Holy cow! I just heard a news flash! The worlds biggest AD-agency, with 6000 employees, worldwide, Saatch&Saatchi, is pondering about setting up their own photo-agency, they are apparently sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment and have to spend millions in hiring photogrpahers.
These type of people REALLY know how to run things, take my word for it! if true Im off to them like a shot, even if it means exclusivity.
Being as your stuff is already on-line doesn't that mean that Saatchi has already dismissed it as too "low-quality" for their needs?
-
Bruce told them that next to creating ads, they can make a lot easy of money milking photographers... that's pretty much it.
-
Can you please explain just how this might in any way be the "biggest site in the world"?
An initial question, If they are "sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment" why would they, at not inconsiderable cost, set up an agency to share "higher quality" with the rest of the world?
What a great site this is for tea break humour !
Nah! sorry pal, I meant macDonalds, yeah thats it, the hamburger joint, you know the one? they are starting a site, yeah thats it. Maybe thats easier to grasp and digest for you.
-
Holy cow! I just heard a news flash! The worlds biggest AD-agency, with 6000 employees, worldwide, Saatch&Saatchi, is pondering about setting up their own photo-agency, they are apparently sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment and have to spend millions in hiring photogrpahers.
These type of people REALLY know how to run things, take my word for it! if true Im off to them like a shot, even if it means exclusivity.
Being as your stuff is already on-line doesn't that mean that Saatchi has already dismissed it as too "low-quality" for their needs?
Well at least they will look for my low-quality stuff, as you say. which is better then being ignored completely, know what I mean gotsy boy? :D
-
And, of course, you know who the CEO of Saatchi Online is, right?
[url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url] ([url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url])
[url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url] ([url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url])
Well, well, well. The return of Bitter. And they pay 70%.
-
Just for the record! and just to save myself a load of * commentry. I was not the one calling it for low-quality, not me. just forwarding some news. Instead of fartassing around playing stupid, try and come up with some gues of what would happen and how it would effect the market, etc. if this indeed would happen.
-
And, of course, you know who the CEO of Saatchi Online is, right?
[url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url] ([url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url])
[url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url] ([url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url])
Well, well, well. The return of Bitter. And they pay 70%.
Which one? maurice or charles?
So why dont you read the frigging posts instead, where I clearly say, reffered to as the biggest agency in the world! which is for billings Saatchis but for turnovers it could just as easily be Greys or O&M,
if you know who they are that is.
-
And, of course, you know who the CEO of Saatchi Online is, right?
[url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url] ([url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url])
[url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url] ([url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url])
Well, well, well. The return of Bitter. And they pay 70%.
Well, 70% for prints and things. Not necessarily stock.
Haven't heard any rumblings about them getting into it, tho.
-
Instead of fartassing around playing stupid, try and come up with some gues of what would happen and how it would effect the market, etc. if this indeed would happen.
OK - If indeed this did happen, my opinion is that it would not effect the market in the slightest whatsoever.
The worlds biggest and most professional stock photographers already supply the top existing stock agencies, if the quality isn't good enough for Saatchi & Saatchi (or whichever ad agency it is) at the moment what is it that makes you think that Saatchi (or whoever) starting an agency is going to make photographers start to produce better quality photos, I can't speak for everyone (obviously) but I think it's pretty safe to say that there's not one single stock photographer in the world who's been keeping back his best quality work in anticipation that these guys will start an agency any time soon.
So in other words, an ad agency no matter how big it is, is not going to be able to compete in the stock market against the likes of Getty, Corbis et al because the best stuff is already out there on the existing agencies that have millions of images and years of experience.
I'd equate this announcement along the same level as the other infamous stock agency gossip - "look out the Chinese are coming" :D
-
Saatchi Online is nothing to do with Saatchi & Saatchi. Nor are the Saatchis.
Saatchi Online was set up by Charles Saatchi of the Saatchi Gallery. He has not been involved with Saatchi & Saatchi since the 90s. After they left Saatchi & Saatchi, the Saatchis set up M&C Saatchi. According the web they may no longer be involved with that either.
-
Saatchi Online is nothing to do with Saatchi & Saatchi. Nor are the Saatchis.
Saatchi Online was set up by Charles Saatchi of the Saatchi Gallery. He has not been involved with Saatchi & Saatchi since the 90s. After they left Saatchi & Saatchi, the Saatchis set up M&C Saatchi. According the web they may no longer be involved with that either.
exactly! funny how people try it on, isnt it. Charles Saatchi is not involved as such but he and Maurice still have LOTS of pull.
-
exactly! funny how people try it on, isnt it. Charles Saatchi is not involved as such but he and Maurice still have LOTS of pull.
Exactly what ? Exactly ? What ?
What exactly ?
-
Instead of fartassing around playing stupid, try and come up with some gues of what would happen and how it would effect the market, etc. if this indeed would happen.
OK - If indeed this did happen, my opinion is that it would not effect the market in the slightest whatsoever.
The worlds biggest and most professional stock photographers already supply the top existing stock agencies, if the quality isn't good enough for Saatchi & Saatchi (or whichever ad agency it is) at the moment what is it that makes you think that Saatchi (or whoever) starting an agency is going to make photographers start to produce better quality photos, I can't speak for everyone (obviously) but I think it's pretty safe to say that there's not one single stock photographer in the world who's been keeping back his best quality work in anticipation that these guys will start an agency any time soon.
So in other words, an ad agency no matter how big it is, is not going to be able to compete in the stock market against the likes of Getty, Corbis et al because the best stuff is already out there on the existing agencies that have millions of images and years of experience.
I'd equate this announcement along the same level as the other infamous stock agency gossip - "look out the Chinese are coming" :D
Hi!
What makes me think its Saatchis? well a number of reasons, firstly, during the entire 90s they bought loads from Stones and Image-Bank, Alberto-Sciama, Ceo of Pictor International was a personal friend of the young marketing-director, who is actually still there and who was heavily involved in the photo-library industry.
Saatchis always backed the photo-agency industry, OM, was dead against it and Greys, well they got weird billings actually, not really calling for much stock-shots.
Im guessing ofcourse.
However, as independants, shouldnt we all welcome something like this? I dont understand the fuss really, photo-agency business has been going for almost 50 years now.
I mean the way its going with the micros and other agencies, I think we need a some fresh air actually and Kevin Roberts, acting CEO of Saatchis was once head of TV and photography.
Kevin
-
exactly! funny how people try it on, isnt it. Charles Saatchi is not involved as such but he and Maurice still have LOTS of pull.
Exactly what ? Exactly ? What ?
What exactly ?
exactly! that!
-
Im guessing ofcourse
I guessed that.
-
Sorry if I'm not sharing in the enthusiasm of the possibility that a huge ad agency is considering getting into stock. I have a pretty low opinion of agencies to begin with, despite the fact that some of them are our customers, and so I'm not so excited about the idea that a big bloated agency thinks they can do better than some of the other offerings out there already. Agencies are inherently inefficient, and they burn through money like crazy, hence their hefty fees for work that smaller outfits could do just as well. For a company considering a jump into stock, the big agency business model won't work. Unless they plan to run their stock offering in a completely different way, I don't see Saatchi being able to succeed in this business.
The one thing they'd have going for them is Bruce. Other than that, I see no reason to think that this is really going anywhere any time soon, if ever.
-
Hi!
What makes me think its Saatchis? well a number of reasons, firstly, during the entire 90s they bought loads from Stones and Image-Bank, Alberto-Sciama, Ceo of Pictor International was a personal friend of the young marketing-director, who is actually still there and who was heavily involved in the photo-library industry.
Saatchis always backed the photo-agency industry, OM, was dead against it and Greys, well they got weird billings actually, not really calling for much stock-shots.
Im guessing ofcourse.
I didn't ask, but if I had these two comments of yours would have been the reason for my confusion.
Holy cow! I just heard a news flash! The worlds biggest AD-agency, with 6000 employees, worldwide, Saatch&Saatchi, is pondering about setting up their own photo-agency, they are apparently sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment and have to spend millions in hiring photogrpahers.
The only thing Im not sure of is if its Saatchis? before it dissapeared it said "biggest AD-Agency in the world. Well the British Saatchis, has been the biggest for the last 40 years, in billings that is but as far as turnover is concerned it could be O&M or Greys? although iuf its true, I hope its Saatchis. Nice people, well, at least they were nice people.
In short - would it be right to say that you've heard a rumour that an ad agency, possibly a big one, is pondering over the idea that they may think about setting up a photo agency.
However, as independants, shouldnt we all welcome something like this?
Absolutely ???
-
And, of course, you know who the CEO of Saatchi Online is, right?
[url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url] ([url]http://www.saatchionline.com/collections/view/owner/114954/collection/24[/url])
[url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url] ([url]http://www.artmarketblog.com/2011/02/25/saatchi-online-launches-fine-art-marketplace-artmarketblog-com/[/url])
Well, well, well. The return of Bitter. And they pay 70%.
Which one? maurice or charles?
So why dont you read the frigging posts instead, where I clearly say, reffered to as the biggest agency in the world! which is for billings Saatchis but for turnovers it could just as easily be Greys or O&M,
if you know who they are that is.
You talkin' to me? If so, obviously you're the one who isn't reading the frigging posts.
-
Can you please explain just how this might in any way be the "biggest site in the world"?
An initial question, If they are "sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment" why would they, at not inconsiderable cost, set up an agency to share "higher quality" with the rest of the world?
What a great site this is for tea break humour !
Nah! sorry pal, I meant macDonalds, yeah thats it, the hamburger joint, you know the one? they are starting a site, yeah thats it. Maybe thats easier to grasp and digest for you.
Awaiting your next hyperbolic thread with interest.
-
Can you please explain just how this might in any way be the "biggest site in the world"?
An initial question, If they are "sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment" why would they, at not inconsiderable cost, set up an agency to share "higher quality" with the rest of the world?
What a great site this is for tea break humour !
Nah! sorry pal, I meant macDonalds, yeah thats it, the hamburger joint, you know the one? they are starting a site, yeah thats it. Maybe thats easier to grasp and digest for you.
Awaiting your next hyperbolic thread with interest.
Abzee! frankly, you are beginning to sound exactly the way you sound on the IS forum, I can appreciate business is bad, so on and so forth but man! you sound bitter both here and there.
snap out of it. please.
-
I don't think Saatch&Saatchi would want to open up an agency that would sell images to their rivals. Wouldn't this be for Saatch&Saatchi use only? It could still be interesting, if they let riff raff like me submit. I have to agree that if they aren't happy with the quality of content from the current agencies, they aren't likely to get anything better without paying much more for it. Perhaps they aren't happy with other elements of the current agencies service?
-
Hi!
What makes me think its Saatchis? well a number of reasons, firstly, during the entire 90s they bought loads from Stones and Image-Bank, Alberto-Sciama, Ceo of Pictor International was a personal friend of the young marketing-director, who is actually still there and who was heavily involved in the photo-library industry.
Saatchis always backed the photo-agency industry, OM, was dead against it and Greys, well they got weird billings actually, not really calling for much stock-shots.
Im guessing ofcourse.
I didn't ask, but if I had these two comments of yours would have been the reason for my confusion.
Holy cow! I just heard a news flash! The worlds biggest AD-agency, with 6000 employees, worldwide, Saatch&Saatchi, is pondering about setting up their own photo-agency, they are apparently sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment and have to spend millions in hiring photogrpahers.
The only thing Im not sure of is if its Saatchis? before it dissapeared it said "biggest AD-Agency in the world. Well the British Saatchis, has been the biggest for the last 40 years, in billings that is but as far as turnover is concerned it could be O&M or Greys? although iuf its true, I hope its Saatchis. Nice people, well, at least they were nice people.
In short - would it be right to say that you've heard a rumour that an ad agency, possibly a big one, is pondering over the idea that they may think about setting up a photo agency.
However, as independants, shouldnt we all welcome something like this?
Absolutely ???
I dont know what you are trying to say mate? Know why I started this thread? in the hope of that somebody else, possibly when they wake up in the US, could shed some more info on this one, I personally would welcome something like this, Gettys world monopoly? well look at the last contract, sign or get . out! nice isnt it.
Not for one second would they act in this way if there was a few more players with close to equal strength. Thats why.
Saatch, is the only major agency thats for many, many years showed a private interest in photography, during the entire 80s and 90s, they even staged photography competitions. It would stand to reason that if its not just gossip, it could be them.
-
Wouldn't this be for Saatch&Saatchi use only? It could still be interesting
It is not real.
-
(http://intepid.com/res/417.gif)
-
Can you please explain just how this might in any way be the "biggest site in the world"?
An initial question, If they are "sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment" why would they, at not inconsiderable cost, set up an agency to share "higher quality" with the rest of the world?
What a great site this is for tea break humour !
Nah! sorry pal, I meant macDonalds, yeah thats it, the hamburger joint, you know the one? they are starting a site, yeah thats it. Maybe thats easier to grasp and digest for you.
Awaiting your next hyperbolic thread with interest.
Abzee! frankly, you are beginning to sound exactly the way you sound on the IS forum, I can appreciate business is bad, so on and so forth but man! you sound bitter both here and there.
snap out of it. please.
Bitter?! I'm finding this highly amusing and derive great enjoyment from your posts.
-
Wouldn't this be for Saatch&Saatchi use only? It could still be interesting
It is not real.
I know exactly who you are and what you represent, in every forum youre a mamber, IS, forum as well, you never add, give or gain any information. With the typical generalist portfolio you have Im not surprised about your frustration.
May I suggest you go and play with yourself over at the IS forum and frankly with youre shooting style, you need not worry about any AD agency contacting you.
-
I dont know what you are trying to say mate? Know why I started this thread? in the hope of that somebody else, possibly when they wake up in the US, could shed some more info on this one, I personally would welcome something like this, Gettys world monopoly? well look at the last contract, sign or get . out! nice isnt it.
Not for one second would they act in this way if there was a few more players with close to equal strength. Thats why.
Saatch, is the only major agency thats for many, many years showed a private interest in photography, during the entire 80s and 90s, they even staged photography competitions. It would stand to reason that if its not just gossip, it could be them.
What I'm trying to say is that you started a thread about Saatchi & Saachti starting an agency, but then went onto say that you're not sure whether it's them or not, add to this that's it's just a rumour about them "pondering" over starting an agency, which means as far as I can tell you've started a thread that tells us nothing at all.
However as I pointed out if they did start an agency it certainly wouldn't be anywhere near the "Biggest site in the world" and certainly not something to get excited about.
We'd all welcome something to rival Getty's monopoly but it hasn't happened yet and isn't likely happen. Of late I've noticed you've started a lot of threads and made posts that would indicate to me things aren't going well for you at the moment, I'm genuinely sorry to hear that I really am, but I suggest you need to adapt to how the market is or find another source for income.
-
Can you please explain just how this might in any way be the "biggest site in the world"?
An initial question, If they are "sick and tired of the "low-quality" being offered at the moment" why would they, at not inconsiderable cost, set up an agency to share "higher quality" with the rest of the world?
What a great site this is for tea break humour !
Nah! sorry pal, I meant macDonalds, yeah thats it, the hamburger joint, you know the one? they are starting a site, yeah thats it. Maybe thats easier to grasp and digest for you.
Awaiting your next hyperbolic thread with interest.
Abzee! frankly, you are beginning to sound exactly the way you sound on the IS forum, I can appreciate business is bad, so on and so forth but man! you sound bitter both here and there.
snap out of it. please.
Bitter?! I'm finding this highly amusing and derive great enjoyment from your posts.
Doubt it! I read misery between the lines, sorry mate.
all the best.
-
I dont know what you are trying to say mate? Know why I started this thread? in the hope of that somebody else, possibly when they wake up in the US, could shed some more info on this one, I personally would welcome something like this, Gettys world monopoly? well look at the last contract, sign or get . out! nice isnt it.
Not for one second would they act in this way if there was a few more players with close to equal strength. Thats why.
Saatch, is the only major agency thats for many, many years showed a private interest in photography, during the entire 80s and 90s, they even staged photography competitions. It would stand to reason that if its not just gossip, it could be them.
What I'm trying to say is that you started a thread about Saatchi & Saachti starting an agency, but then went onto say that you're not sure whether it's them or not, add to this that's it's just a rumour about them "pondering" over starting an agency, which means as far as I can tell you've started a thread that tells us nothing at all.
However as I pointed out if they did start an agency it certainly wouldn't be anywhere near the "Biggest site in the world" and certainly not something to get excited about.
We'd all welcome something to rival Getty's monopoly but it hasn't happened yet and isn't likely happen. Of late I've noticed you've started a lot of threads and made posts that would indicate to me things aren't going well for you at the moment, I'm genuinely sorry to hear that I really am, but I suggest you need to adapt to how the market is or find another source for income.
RT! now youre being silly and smallish, you know very well that Micro, still represent a very small percentage of my income. However if I wanted to or rather needed to I could live quite well on Micro revenue alone. Sure IS, has heart everybodys income, yours too but for me its well made up by the others.
I must say I expected more from you then just joining up with the usual crowd of three, four members who is always just ventilating, no matter what.
Isnt it also strange that the ones beefing with me are the ones that feel a threat, simply because they know very well no large ad-agency, would ever contact them.
-
What a great site this is for tea break humour !
Yes I need to follow you, sit back and watch the fun, instead of trying to make sense of it.
So this isn't the Microstock Rapture? Darn... :D
-
Chris I have always enjoyed your threads/comments/opinion but now you are becoming a little pretentious, you can be a top shooter, whatever but humble doesn´t have price (newbie here doesn´t count much) but I would take that way and forget "personal attacks", that would mean you are above
-
I know exactly who you are and what you represent, in every forum youre a mamber, IS, forum as well
I don't represent anyone or anything. I'm agnostic. FWIW - I am here and at the iStockphoto forum. I have posted at dpreview maybe 3 times in the past decade. I read the Alamy and Getty forums but have never posted on them. That's it. I'm not a forum member anywhere else. And I don't think you do know me. Maybe in the 90s but I don't remember you. I think you are confused.
frankly with youre shooting style, you need not worry about any AD agency contacting you.
You were just praising my small portfolio not long ago. But you are right - I have to improve and focus. Thanks for reminding me. Amazingly though I already do work for an ad agency. I guess that shows that we can all find our level. Even a pleb like me.
-
Lets forget this thread now, shall we! its of no use and lets just say I dreamt the whole thing and then woke up. Pointless flogging a dead horse.
sorry guys but Im always a bit dizzy in the early morning hours and probably heard/saw the wrong thing.