Found via istockphoto thread.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20059972-264.html#ixzz1LUkpWgur

KKT's Foot-in-month Quote of the Day:
"Expansion has been tough for the company, though, because of a contributor payment system that the company judged financially unsustainable. A switch last year to a performance-based compensation scheme was painful, but in the end, only about 0.1 percent of the more than 100,000 contributors were dramatically affected, Thompson said.
Run that past me again...

"It didn't really affect most people," Thompson said. "Everyone sort of settled down."

And if we didn't, we were LOBOtomised.

Lies, damned lies, statistics and spin.

It's so disheartening.  I always hope to see commentary from Kelly (as some sort of reassurance that he's paying attention?) but it seems like every time he actually says something it's a massive disappointment and proves that he just doesn't get it.  Which means it's hard to hope that things will improve at iStock because its management is on a completely different page than its contributors.

Truly gobsmacking.

I'm dramatically affected.

Be part of 0.1 percent of more than 100,000 contributors is like win somekind of hell's lottery.

There are two other little teasers in this article (if one can stomach reading beyond KKT's dismissal of contributor discontent).

"And one more new category coming for iStock: the PNG, (portable network graphics) format. Its big advantage compared with JPEG: it supports an "alpha" channel that lets designers mark parts of the overall image as transparent. That means objects work with colored or complex backgrounds without arduous image editing"

and

"Another IT project at iStock is the move to a new Getty system that's more flexible. Today, each new category requires a new infrastructure, but the new technology will let iStock offer new categories as just a new module."

I have no idea what the 2nd one is referring to

Maybe he gets it but just doesn't care.

Istock may find that many people did not "settle down".;they are biding their time and/or changing direction away from stock.

Quote from: jsnover on May 05, 2011, 17:39
"Another IT project at iStock is the move to a new Getty system that's more flexible. Today, each new category requires a new infrastructure, but the new technology will let iStock offer new categories as just a new module."
I have no idea what the 2nd one is referring to

Took me a while, but I'm guessing, as he's referring to PNG as a 'category', he means any other offering type they decide to sell, e.g. books, second-hand shoes, holidays ... <idle speculation>maybe they're aiming to take over Amazon or eBay.</speculation>
:-(

They're talking about the programming code there aren't they?

I read that as meaning that they currently have a large-scale job each time they add a new category, but they'll adopt Getty's modular approach and adding new categories will be easier and faster.

Perhaps I'm wrong, but that's how it reads to me.

wow, I'm one in a thousand... does that mean he thinks only around 100 submitters were dramatically affected? Either he is way out of touch or full of hot air.

Quote from: ShadySue on May 05, 2011, 17:26
Found via istockphoto thread.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-20059972-264.html#ixzz1LUkpWgur

KKT's Foot-in-month Quote of the Day:
"Expansion has been tough for the company, though, because of a contributor payment system that the company judged financially unsustainable. A switch last year to a performance-based compensation scheme was painful, but in the end, only about 0.1 percent of the more than 100,000 contributors were dramatically affected, Thompson said.

"It didn't really affect most people," Thompson said. "Everyone sort of settled down."

And if we didn't, we were LOBOtomised.

Lies, damned lies, statistics and spin.

hahah i was laughing when i read that. But seriously, why would he say anything else since this article is advertisement for the uninformed? It is really laughable to all who knows whats going on.

I wonder what he meant by "dramatically affected", suicide maybe...

So disheartening to see the COO spin these untruths to the media, especially when these moves have hurt livelihoods. He truly doesn't care at all.  Note again that he's never been promoted to CEO. Not too difficult to see why.  

Quote from: jsmithzz on May 05, 2011, 17:52
So disheartening to see the COO spin these untruths to the media, especially when these moves have hurt livelihoods. He truly doesn't care at all.  Note again that he's never been promoted to CEO. Not too difficult to see why.  

And it's not first time. This guy is a SERIAL LIAR.

Quote from: jsnover on May 05, 2011, 17:39
"And one more new category coming for iStock: the PNG, (portable network graphics) format. Its big advantage compared with JPEG: it supports an "alpha" channel that lets designers mark parts of the overall image as transparent. That means objects work with colored or complex backgrounds without arduous image editing"

They'll probably use this to cheat vector artists out of higher price point vector sales. I'm suspicious.

What is dramatically affected? Aren't 85% of contributors non-exclusive? I would imagine nearly 100% of them took a paycut. Where does he pull these numbers out of?

I was firmly within the alleged "0.1 percent", so that's me and 999 others. Even if it were true it's still appalling.

The phrase "Liar Liar pants on fire" springs to mind. 

How many contributors does Istock have nowadays?

"Everyone sort of settled down.", really? I guess getting tired of ranting to a brick wall on the forums constitutes agreement. I won't forget what they did.

Quote from: jsnover on May 05, 2011, 17:39
"the PNG, (portable network graphics) format. Its big advantage compared with JPEG: it supports an "alpha" channel that lets designers mark parts of the overall image as transparent."

thanks, but no need for an alpha channel: seeing from sales stats, all of my pictures there are already transparent and invisibile to buyers lately  

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on May 05, 2011, 18:54

Quote from: jsnover on May 05, 2011, 17:39
"the PNG, (portable network graphics) format. Its big advantage compared with JPEG: it supports an "alpha" channel that lets designers mark parts of the overall image as transparent."

thanks, but no need for an alpha channel: seeing from sales stats, all of my pictures there are already transparent and invisibile to buyers lately  

lol

Quote from: microstockphoto.co.uk on May 05, 2011, 18:54

Quote from: jsnover on May 05, 2011, 17:39
"the PNG, (portable network graphics) format. Its big advantage compared with JPEG: it supports an "alpha" channel that lets designers mark parts of the overall image as transparent."

thanks, but no need for an alpha channel: seeing from sales stats, all of my pictures there are already transparent and invisibile to buyers lately  

ROFL
( in a sad way )

Quote
And if we didn't, we were LOBOtomised.

lol, glad to see my ban at least bared some fruit.
next time i'm making the tshirt as well..

Ooops the claim is 100 people got screwed not 1000 as I said.

He obviously just has a different definition of "dramatically" than we do.  Kind of like the millionaire who considers himself broke if he only has $999,999 in his account.

istock site is down here. Could this have anything to do with it? There is one angry topic in the discussion forum. Bet it won't be there when the sites back up.