Author Topic: Biggest site in the world might come! (Read 23034 times)

lagereek · « **Reply #25 on:** May 25, 2011, 09:22 »

Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 08:43

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 06:44
Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 05:58
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.

sharpshot · « **Reply #26 on:** May 25, 2011, 09:22 »

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?

lagereek · « **Reply #27 on:** May 25, 2011, 09:32 »

Quote from: RT on May 25, 2011, 08:20

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 07:43
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.

Quote from: 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.

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 05:30
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.

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 07:43
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.

bunhill · « **Reply #28 on:** May 25, 2011, 10:02 »

Quote from: sharpshot on May 25, 2011, 09:22

Wouldn't this be for Saatch&Saatchi use only? It could still be interesting

It is not real.

bunhill · « **Reply #29 on:** May 25, 2011, 10:03 »

thesentinel · « **Reply #30 on:** May 25, 2011, 11:17 »

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 09:22

Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 08:43
Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 06:44
Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 05:58
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.

lagereek · « **Reply #31 on:** May 25, 2011, 11:20 »

Quote from: bunhill on May 25, 2011, 10:02

Quote from: sharpshot on May 25, 2011, 09:22
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.

RT · « **Reply #32 on:** May 25, 2011, 11:21 »

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 09:32

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.

lagereek · « **Reply #33 on:** May 25, 2011, 11:22 »

Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 11:17

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 09:22
Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 08:43
Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 06:44
Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 05:58
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.

lagereek · « **Reply #34 on:** May 25, 2011, 11:39 »

Quote from: RT on May 25, 2011, 11:21

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 09:32
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.

RacePhoto · « **Reply #35 on:** May 25, 2011, 12:45 »

Quote from: thesentinel on May 25, 2011, 05:58

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...

luissantos84 · « **Reply #36 on:** May 25, 2011, 12:52 »

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

bunhill · « **Reply #37 on:** May 25, 2011, 13:01 »

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 11:20

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.

Quote from: lagereek on May 25, 2011, 11:20

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.

lagereek · « **Reply #38 on:** May 25, 2011, 13:43 »

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.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Biggest site in the world might come! (Read 23034 times)

lagereek

sharpshot

lagereek

bunhill

bunhill

thesentinel

lagereek

RT

lagereek

lagereek

RacePhoto

luissantos84

bunhill

lagereek

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors