MicrostockGroup

Agency Based Discussion => iStockPhoto.com => Topic started by: FreeTransform on April 08, 2011, 00:39

Title: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: FreeTransform on April 08, 2011, 00:39
I've noticed lately more threads on iStock are being completely deleted, rather than being locked. Recently there was the one in the Vector forum about Russell Tate. I didn't think that thread would get very far, but I didn't expect it to just disappear.

Tonight I was looking for another thread, one of the ones that promised "great things" ahead for vectors. I had actually copied the permalink back when it was originally posted, in case I needed to refer to it later, but now the link just goes back to the main Forums page.

Before I go into conspiracy theory mode, here is the link:

http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=253532&page=1#post4872401 (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=253532&page=1#post4872401)

Did F5 mess up the permalinks? Or has it perhaps been deleted altogether? Here's the quote, btw:

"Please also know that we do have some great things planned for Vectors, however to keep our competitive advantage, we're not able to announce them at this time, but will very shortly."

 
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on April 08, 2011, 01:58
So if you look at this thread (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=290982) there is some discussion and a link to thread 253532 and that thread is apparently gonzo.

I can find this thread (http://www.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=251812&page=1) which says:

"For the remainder of 2010, Vectors will be removed from the Vetta Collection and added back into the Exclusive collection under the Elaborate category (at the same price point). We have a bigger plan in the works for Vectors and will be telling you more about this in the months to come. "

Even using the wayback machine, all I can see is the title of the thread you have a link to. It was the FAQ for the Sept 7th announcements that was sticky for a while. Not sure how long this link will function, but here is what Google had cached (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xYTFgppsETEJ:espanol.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php%3Fthreadid%3D253532%26page%3D1+%22upcoming+changes+announced+September+7%22+site:istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com) for this thread.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: caspixel on April 08, 2011, 09:01
Doesn't surprise me one bit. They started "disappearing" many who disagreed with them a while ago. Why shouldn't entire threads be next? And of course, they'd most certainly want to delete threads where they promised something, lest it be used as evidence when they don't do what they say.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Chris3fer on April 08, 2011, 09:27
I agree that they would probably delete anything that promised stuff that they have no intention of delivering.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: lisafx on April 08, 2011, 09:46
All the more reason to quote and repost anything significant here at MSG, rather than just posting links. 

Shame it has to come to that, but they can't just be allowed to rewrite history by deleting threads containing broken promises. 
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Sadstock on April 08, 2011, 11:18
Assuming this is not yet another bug, this is really pathetic and it makes me sick.  I can see disappearing a thread about a contributor who has issues/problems with an account, but to disappear a thread of only Istock admin postings laying out what the process/policies/future looks like is just wrong and an admission of just how out of control things really are. 

Is there any way to trust an organization that disappears official policy? 

Somebody should call them on this.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Sadstock on April 08, 2011, 11:20
Don't know how long google cache lasts, so I'm posting the lost thread here since its important - sorry for the long post

rogermexico

Comentado Fri Sep 10, 2010 4:34PM The complete details of all the coming changes are here. Please take the time to read this.

Here is a summary along with some frequently asked questions and answers.

How does the new royalty structure work?
Beginning in January 2011 all iStock contributors will qualify annually for their royalty rates. Your royalty rate will no longer be tied to your lifetime downloads total. Instead it will depend on how many credits were used downloading your files over the course of the previous year.

Redeemed Credits
There is now a Redeemed Credit total counter on the stats tab of your profile page. This represents the absolute value of credits used downloading your files.
-If you get a 1 credit extra small photo download, it goes up one.
-If you get a 20 credit extra large Exclusive photo download, it goes
up 20.
-If you get a 150 credit extended license download, it goes up 150.

There is a different total for each file type.

Currently the counter updates every week but we will have it updating daily soon.

How do Redeemed Credits determine royalties?
Every January we will announce royalty targets for the upcoming year. So in January 2011, we will announce the targets for 2012.

On January 1, 2012 your starting royalty for 2012 will be determined by whichever target your Redeemed Credit total meets.

Here are some examples using the 2011 targets posted here.

If you are an Exclusive photo contributor and have 42,000 redeemed photo credits at the end of 2010, your starting royalty rate on January 1, 2011 will be 35%. Remember: this is just your starting rate for the year.

If you are an Exclusive Vector contributor and have 76,000 redeemed video credits at the end of 2010, your starting royalty rate on January 1, 2011 will be 35%.

Why are the targets different for each file type?

The average download for each file type involves a different number of credits. The average illustration download involves almost twice as many credits as the average photo download. So to keep the
distribution of the different royalty levels more or less similar between different kinds of artists, the targets need to be different.

A Vector artist's Redeemed Credit total will grow faster than a photographer's who gets the same number of downloads. So while the targets for the Vector artist are higher, if the Vector artist and Photographer are similarly successful as far as the number of downloads they get, they will progress through the royalty targets at roughly the same rate.

Do Redeemed Credits carry over year to year?
No. Every year your Redeemed Credit total resets to zero and you begin accumulating them again.

Will my royalty ever go down during the course of a year?
No. You will be guaranteed that initial royalty for the full calendar year. Your initial royalty for the following year may go up or down depending which target you hit.

Can my royalty increase during the course of a year?
Yes. Each January your Redeemed Credit total resets to zero and you begin accumulating them again towards the next year's goals. If at some point during the year your total hits one of the higher targets,
you will immediately graduate to the higher level.

For example, if you start 2011 at 35%, and reach the 2012 Redeemed Credit level for 40% during course of 2011, you will immediately move to the higher rate.


Are the targets flexible?
The targets are based on our best projections for the upcoming year's growth and sales. If we discover that we are off in our projections as a year goes on - that the goals are too difficult and too many contributors are missing them - we will adjust them, yes.

* * *

The Agency Collection
The Agency Collection will be a new premium content collection at iStockphoto coming in late September / early October. It will contain content from select iStock contributors and photography agencies within the Getty Images family.

How does an iStock contributor get their photographs into Agency?
We will be inviting photographers to contribute with the aim of engaging people who create excellent images, can help us fill some of the gaps in our regionalized content, or are creating work that we feel will sell well a this price and at the different sites Agency will be available.

Where will the Agency Collection be available?
iStock, Getty Images, Jupiter and PunchStock.

What are the royalties?
For dowloads here at iStockphoto, the royalties will range from 22, 24, 26, 28 & 30%.

For downloads at all other sites the royalty will be 20%. Please note that at other sites Agency Collection will have a higher price point and a slightly modified license.

Why are the royalties at iStock different for this Agency Collection content?
Because the content itself is closer to 'traditional' RF prices, it comes with a modified royalty – still higher than the standard Getty Images 20%.

What kind of photographs will be in this collection?
Content for Agency is being chosen specifically to address under-represented areas of the iStock colleciton, specifically regional content from different international markets.

Will content from outside of iStockphoto in the Agency Collection
be inspected?
Yes. Every photograph in the Agency Collection will go through our regular inspection process.

(Edited on 2010-09-10 18:39:25 by sylvanworks)

 


joyze

Comentado Wed Sep 15, 2010 2:57PM First I want to start by letting you all know that I have read all of the forum posts and spoken with many of you personally and I both feel and understand your frustrations and concerns. I want to reassure you that we have spent a long time working on this change, crunching numbers and looking at different options. At the end of the day, these changes were necessary to ensure long-term success for iStock over competitors from customers looking for the best, freshest stock content, and will keep the community thriving. I know many of you don’t want to believe us and some of you say you have lost trust in us. I’d like to ask that you at least give this new program a chance and give us the chance to win your trust back. The below aims to provide answers to your most pressing concerns and issues. If you still have further questions or require further clarification, please contact Contributor Relations.


1. “Why should we endure these pay cuts when the company is so “successful”?

Please be assured that we have not taken any decisions or made any changes lightly. And while we know that they may be painful in the short term for some of you, our motivation in making them is the long-term continued success of the company and the community.
The changes have been decided on the basis of very thorough analysis and projections that indicate if we were to maintain the status quo, it may ultimately impede both the business and our community from prospering.

We believe strongly that this is the best path to iStock’s continued market leadership internationally. If we do not plan and act for longevity, we could easily be caught at the back of the pack. We believe that would hurt everyone here much worse.


2. Why are you not grandfathering anyone in?

The new system is a fresh start and a level playing field. With that as the objective, it wouldn’t make sense to ‘grandfather’ anyone in. We understand this is unexpected and upsetting. You may be having trouble deciding what is best to do. Our contributor relations team is very good at helping people weigh pros and cons based on their unique situations. If you need more clarification, we encourage you to give them a call.


3. What are the new prices for Vetta?

We’ll change pricing on Sept. 27, and it will continue to be priced above Exclusive+, but below the pricing on Getty Images and below The Agency Collection. Designers have told us repeatedly, and it is underscored again in a Graphic Design USA survey just published that they want fresher, better and more exclusive content that is easy to find. And they are willing to pay for it. At the same time, when they want a simple, economical image, they want to be able to go to a one-stop-shop to find either

Small 30 credits
Medium 50 credits
Large 70 credits
XLarge 100 credits
XXLarge 125 credits
XXXLarge 150 credits


4. Why are illustrators' credits worth half of photographers' credits?

Vector targets are higher than photo targets strictly because the average Vector download uses more credits - roughly twice as much. For example, when you download a small photo, 3 credits are used, but we don't offer file size with Vectors so more credits will be redeemed when downloading a vector file on average. We separated the levels for each file type, as it was the most fair to the contributors. Please also know that we do have some great things planned for Vectors, however to keep our competitive advantage, we're not able to announce them at this time, but will very shortly.


5. Because Vectors have a different redeemed credits value than photos, are you separating Vector exclusives, Flash Exclusives and photo exclusives now?

We’ll be exploring that and will have an answer before the end of the year for everyone. But for right now, if you’re exclusive in one, you’re exclusive in all (Photo, Vector and Flash)


6. How will you increase sales?

As in years’ past, we will continue to invest heavily in our marketing and business growth initiatives. These investments certainly include the changes we are making to the site, beginning with F5 and continuing with new and improved search which will make it even easier for more customers to find and download more of your files. We have many marketing and business growth initiatives planned for next year, along with a new and improved search interface. Again, we can't release further details in order to keep our competitive edge.


7. We need more info on Agency Collection—

We survey thousands of customers regularly and from their feedback we learn how we need to grow and expand to meet a broad spectrum of customer needs and ensure they buy from iStock. We know there are many current and prospective customers who purchase from the traditional stock agencies. At the same time, many iStock contributors have asked for a collection like this for their images. So the agency collection is being added to fill a need, not as a replacement. While this will be a small collection, it helps position us to provide a full suite of images in all price ranges to meet all of our clients’ needs.

The images in the agency collection will be treated in the same manner as any file uploaded to the site. They will go through the inspection process and be approved only if they meet the standards we have set for this collection. In search and Best Match the images will be weighted fairly and will not have a heavier weight than any other file. In other words, you won't find the entire agency collection at the front of every search. You will find some agency collection files scattered in with every search, just the same as you see now for Vetta and exclusive plus files.

This collection will give you the opportunity to compete with the best stock houses in the world, on their turf and on your own.


If you'd like to discuss these questions, please post here

(Edited on 2010-09-15 14:58:29 by joyze)

 


joyze

Comentado Tue Sep 28, 2010 4:06PM
We've compiled some more questions that have been asked and answered them below:


1. When are "redeemed credits" going to be fully integrated into stats charts, royalty download pages, etc.

Full integration is expected as we get closer to the implementation of the new royalty levels. Currently, each business day redeemed credit totals are updated for each contributor and available in your stats tab.

2. Why are certain "exclusives" part of Vetta, yet they can sell the same content on other non-Getty sites

The exclusive collection contains photos and illustrations by contributors whose royalty-free stock is only available from iStockphoto and the Getty Images family of companies and their distribution partners. With the Hulton Archive collection, these images may be found elsewhere because Getty is also distributing them through their distribution partners.
As well, there was an issue where a contributor was distributing their images both through iStock and other channels. This is not permitted under our Exclusivity terms and once it was brought to our attention it was handled. When contributors are exclusive with iStock, they may not sell their images through any other channel unless it is a program created through iStock directly. If you find further cases like this one, we ask that you contact us at [email protected] and we’ll investigate the matter and handle it appropriately.

3. Why is it taking so long to do all the F5 fixes for things that were broken (EL page, my_uploads, etc.)

Our development schedule is jam-packed with new features and improvements to existing functionality. We have been focused on optimizing the site for improved customer experience, and now that we've made such a gigantic stride forward in that area, we're turning our focus back on the contributors. We've therefore pushed a whole raft of fixes to the top of our TO Do list. We have front end and back end fixes. Sometimes in order to make the front end fix work we need to focus on the back end first. This is the case for some of these ‘broken’ features. But, I want to reassure you that we are working on them and will have them out to you as quickly as possible. You will see these fixes coming online during our weekly releases over the next few months.

4. How does the "Agency" payment agreement work with outside content - do their sales affect our target levels

The Agency folks that are not contributors to iStock do not collect Redeemed credits, they are paid on a flat percentage rate.


5. Are "Agency" "inspections" causing the exclusive queue to go to almost a week? If not, why is the queue so long?

The Agency files have very little impact on the exclusive queue. We’re aware of the backlog and the inspection team is on a blitz to kick the Q down and it should be back under control soon.

(Edited on 2010-09-28 16:07:02 by joyze)

 
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: FreeTransform on April 08, 2011, 11:38
Not sure how long this link will function, but here is what Google had cached ([url]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xYTFgppsETEJ:espanol.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php%3Fthreadid%3D253532%26page%3D1+%22upcoming+changes+announced+September+7%22+site:istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com[/url]) for this thread.

Thank you. Nothing is ever really deleted from the internet! Wonder why iStock would remove this thread, though?
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: donding on April 08, 2011, 11:45
Well one good thing is that if they ever deny they said it you have proof in that thread....that is if anyone who would dare to post it on the iStock forum doesn't mind getting banned... ;) More than likely permanently.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Sadstock on April 08, 2011, 11:53
Not sure how long this link will function, but here is what Google had cached ([url]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xYTFgppsETEJ:espanol.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php%3Fthreadid%3D253532%26page%3D1+%22upcoming+changes+announced+September+7%22+site:istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com[/url]) for this thread.

Thank you. Nothing is ever really deleted from the internet! Wonder why iStock would remove this thread, though?



--------------------------------------
Its part of JJRD's "different trust" campaign :-)  

http://www1.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314342&page=14 (http://www1.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314342&page=14)
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: jamirae on April 08, 2011, 11:56
wait.. wasn't that whole thread (the one pasted above from google cache) a sticky too?  weird.  there's a lot of helpful information there and you would think they wouldn't delete that.  perhaps it got deleted in error?  (doubt it, but trying to give the benefit of the doubt here.  :) )

Not sure how long this link will function, but here is what Google had cached ([url]http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xYTFgppsETEJ:espanol.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php%3Fthreadid%3D253532%26page%3D1+%22upcoming+changes+announced+September+7%22+site:istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a&source=www.google.com[/url]) for this thread.


Thank you. Nothing is ever really deleted from the internet! Wonder why iStock would remove this thread, though?



--------------------------------------
Its part of JJRD's "different trust" campaign :-)  

[url]http://www1.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314342&page=14[/url] ([url]http://www1.istockphoto.com/forum_messages.php?threadid=314342&page=14[/url])



hahaha..now that is funny!
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: cathyslife on April 08, 2011, 14:23
Assuming this is not yet another bug, this is really pathetic and it makes me sick.  I can see disappearing a thread about a contributor who has issues/problems with an account, but to disappear a thread of only Istock admin postings laying out what the process/policies/future looks like is just wrong and an admission of just how out of control things really are. 

Is there any way to trust an organization that disappears official policy? 

Somebody should call them on this.

There is no way PERIOD to trust this organization. In many more ways than just disappearing threads.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: caspixel on April 08, 2011, 14:41

There is no way PERIOD to trust this organization. In many more ways than just disappearing threads.

Oh, but the conference calls! Don't you know? You can start trusting them again because they are now inviting a select view, under an NDA, to special meetings!
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: lisafx on April 08, 2011, 15:28
With so many independent contributors informing buyers of what's been happening at Istock, perhaps it was deemed a bad idea to have the proof right there in the forums.  Also, with Getty most likely for sale, that sort of controversy in the forums might hurt the asking price, or even scare off skittish investors.  Just a thought.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Perry on April 08, 2011, 15:38
iStock has a strong feel of a communist dictature.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: KB on April 08, 2011, 16:38
iStock has a strong feel of a communist dictature.
iStock is quickly catching up to DT and FT in this, but they still have a ways to go.

Oh, how cool! I never noticed that deetee and efftee get expanded from their acronyms!  Is this new, or am I more of an idiot than I thought? ;D

Testing ... SS, BS, BigStock, StockXpert. Hmmm. So BS isn't expanded, but "bee esp pee" is expanded -- to BigStock?! Fun stuff!
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: leaf on April 08, 2011, 16:44
iStock has a strong feel of a communist dictature.
iStock is quickly catching up to Dreamstime and Fotolia in this, but they still have a ways to go.

Oh, how cool! I never noticed that deetee and efftee get expanded from their acronyms!  Is this new, or am I more of an idiot than I thought? ;D

Testing ... Shutterstock, BS, BigStock, StockXpert. Hmmm. So BS isn't expanded, but "bee esp pee" is expanded -- to BigStock?! Fun stuff!

yeah, it is fairly new (within the last three weeks).. the only trouble is when someone links to a thread that has D T in the title, for example... it gets changed to dreamstime and creates a bad link.  Gotta figure that one out still.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Jo Ann Snover on April 08, 2011, 16:45
Some things get deleted - I quoted from a recent FT ad which referenced the occupying force in France during WWII (n*a*z*i*s) and the forum deleted that word.

It doesn't expand IS to iStock, neither does ISP - does anything?

The only think I don't like about the expansion is that it makes learning the shorthand harder (for those of us who type in two or three letter abbreviations, it got learned prior to the forum getting so smart). It certainly does cut down on the "what does xxx mean" questions though.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: bunhill on April 08, 2011, 16:49
Also, with Getty most likely for sale

What makes you say it is for sale ? I think you hinted that on a previous thread too. Is it just a hunch?

I know that you might be right - but surely any potential buyer would be looking at any growth over the previous period and knowing full well that this had been achieved by cutting royalties and increasing prices. Is there much else left to do in terms of growing the business unless the economy actually starts to improve?

Well i suppose they could tweak the search engines to push more lower commission work ?

Also - if the business is profitable and genuinely growing then why sell it ?
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: aeonf on April 08, 2011, 16:54
^^^ That's how these hedge funds, VC's and private equity work. They are not into long term investments (like Warren Buffet for example) their goal is to buy a good bussiness, make it better (more profitable) and flip it.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: donding on April 08, 2011, 16:57
Also, with Getty most likely for sale

What makes you say it is for sale ? I think you hinted that on a previous thread too. Is it just a hunch?

I know that you might be right - but surely any potential buyer would be looking at any growth over the previous period and knowing full well that this had been achieved by cutting royalties and increasing prices. Is there much else left to do in terms of growing the business unless the economy actually starts to improve?

Well i suppose they could tweak the search engines to push more lower commission work ?

Also - if the business is profitable and genuinely growing then why sell it ?

Getty is owned by the private equity firm Hellman & Friedman. Somewhere someone posted a link on here awhile ago which was about the purchase of Getty and about the stock being pulled off the market and it said in there that they (Hellman & Friedman) usually sell off their purchases within 3 years for profit. They are a private company so there is no transparency there.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: bunhill on April 08, 2011, 17:15
How would  any buyer achieve sustainable growth on their investment ? Put the prices up even higher ? Cut royalties to 10% ? Either of those risk what could be fatal backlash.

Or suppose there was an IPO ? How could stock holder expectations of real growth ever be achieved long term in the current economy ?

Point surely is that the whole thing needs a few year of stability starting sooner or later or else it risks imploding. Which would be a huge shame.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Mantis on April 08, 2011, 18:22
How would  any buyer achieve sustainable growth on their investment ? Put the prices up even higher ? Cut royalties to 10% ? Either of those risk what could be fatal backlash.

Or suppose there was an IPO ? How could stock holder expectations of real growth ever be achieved long term in the current economy ?

Point surely is that the whole thing needs a few year of stability starting sooner or later or else it risks imploding. Which would be a huge shame.

The three large company sales I've been involved in all looked at the last three years of revenue, growth and profitability at a minimum.  Knowing this our company did everything they could to pad the books, including cutting out advertising (like IS has apparently done so to some degree anyway), raising prices (like Istock has done), changed the sales force commission structure to favor the company's revenue stream (or pay more in commissions if stretch goals were met...kinda like the RC system at IS), pushed (and upsold) the more profitable products even though the lesser ones did the job just fine (like IS is doing with Agency and Vetta), controlled headcount and cut out overtime.  They did this for three years to show how strong the books were.  It is this behavior that makes an impending Getty sale more believable; it's probably why Lisa (and I happen to agree) believes a sale might be looming, or even an IPO as suggested.

Also, getting rid of "damaging or negative" threads is probably good Istock strategy when it comes to protecting the brand....assuming a sale or IPO is in the crystal ball.

Just my 2 cents.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: lisafx on April 08, 2011, 20:01

The three large company sales I've been involved in all looked at the last three years of revenue, growth and profitability at a minimum.  Knowing this our company did everything they could to pad the books, including cutting out advertising (like IS has apparently done so to some degree anyway), raising prices (like Istock has done), changed the sales force commission structure to favor the company's revenue stream (or pay more in commissions if stretch goals were met...kinda like the RC system at IS), pushed (and upsold) the more profitable products even though the lesser ones did the job just fine (like IS is doing with Agency and Vetta), controlled headcount and cut out overtime.  They did this for three years to show how strong the books were.  It is this behavior that makes an impending Getty sale more believable; it's probably why Lisa (and I happen to agree) believes a sale might be looming, or even an IPO as suggested.


Very well stated Mantis.  It's only from listening to smart folks like you and others on this forum that I came to see a sale as likely.  I can't take credit for having figured it out on my own.  :)
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: stockastic on April 08, 2011, 20:20
I imagine it only gets uglier after a sale, if  the new owners find out that the real, baseline profitability isn't what they were led to believe.  Since they just made a bigger mistake than the previous owners, they have to take even more extreme measures, especially if they 'leveraged' themselves just a bit to make the acquisition.  
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 04:30
I suppose you guys could be right about a sale sometime soon. But I should have thought that an IPO would be very unlikely.

Why would they sell it as a part finished transformation ? Why not wait until the transformation is more complete?
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: cathyslife on April 09, 2011, 07:51
I imagine it only gets uglier after a sale, if  the new owners find out that the real, baseline profitability isn't what they were led to believe.  Since they just made a bigger mistake than the previous owners, they have to take even more extreme measures, especially if they 'leveraged' themselves just a bit to make the acquisition.  

Great point. I left my account open, just in case new owners came in with a more sensible gameplan. But your scenario seems more likely, and my attempt at keeping a foot in the door is likely to be futile.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Mantis on April 09, 2011, 08:09
I suppose you guys could be right about a sale sometime soon. But I should have thought that an IPO would be very unlikely.

Why would they sell it as a part finished transformation ? Why not wait until the transformation is more complete?

I think they are...from my personal experience anyway.  When our corporate leaders decided we were putting ourselves up for sale, the "enhancing of the books" was a priority for three years before we sought buyers and made our intentions public.  So perhaps they are going through these pains now but won't formally announce anything for the next 36 months or so.  My guess is, assuming there is an impending sale or IPO, that they are rushing to get things as optimized as possible from a web site functionality viewpoint and that the continuing policy changes are meant to pad the financials, as is the best match changes they keep doing by prioritizing Vetta and Agency.

To be fair to Istock, I have ZERO knowledge of anything like this happening over there, only that the symptoms of a sale do exist.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 08:26
Nah! Nobody is going to buy a company by mistake. That's daft :)

EDIT: sorry not responding to the post immediately above

Think about it. You don't buy things because they are rubbish.

If it were to be sold then that would surely be a vote of confidence. And it will be all about continuity. My guess is that even if it were all to be sold not much would change.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 08:35
To be fair to Istock, I have ZERO knowledge of anything like this happening over there, only that the symptoms of a sale do exist.

You mean they want the business to be ticking along nicely, optimized and running properly ? If so then surely that makes sense anyhow, sale or no sale?

If I paint my house and fix the fence it doesn't mean I'm planning to sell it.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: disorderly on April 09, 2011, 08:40
If I paint my house and fix the fence it doesn't mean I'm planning to sell it.

But if you paint over the cracks in your foundation, that's a pretty good indication that you're trying to hide major flaws.  If you were in it for the long haul, you'd fix the problems rather than trying to paint over them.  None of iStock's actions suggest a long term strategy.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 09:00

My guess is that even if it were all to be sold not much would change.

Right. Because *nothing* changed after Getty bought it...
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: lisafx on April 09, 2011, 12:12

My guess is that even if it were all to be sold not much would change.

Right. Because *nothing* changed after Getty bought it...

Took the words right out of my mouth Carolyn :)
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: bunhill on April 09, 2011, 12:18

My guess is that even if it were all to be sold not much would change.

Right. Because *nothing* changed after Getty bought it...

AFAIK nobody is suggesting that Getty is planning to sell iStockphoto.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: caspixel on April 09, 2011, 12:27

My guess is that even if it were all to be sold not much would change.

Right. Because *nothing* changed after Getty bought it...

AFAIK nobody is suggesting that Getty is planning to sell iStockphoto.

Well, since they are all owned by H&F who knows. They could sell Getty and ISP as seperate entities, or as one package. Either way, iStock will have a new owner, because Getty doesn't really "own" iStock anymore, does it? H&F does.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: donding on April 09, 2011, 15:59
I don't think iStock is losing money and by reducing commissions they are making more. An investment firm has to make it look the best it can to take home a larger chunk. Think about it...wouldn't you invest more in a company that shows a profit of 2 million than one that shows profit of 1 million? Their goal could be to make 2 million so they can get X amount profit from a sale. iStock is making money...there is no way they aren't...the question is how much profit has to be there in order to maximize the profits from the sale. That's the question.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: pancaketom on April 09, 2011, 23:51
I think their actions to produce a short term boost in profits makes a sale more likely than some sort of long term sustainable strategy. What they are doing now is not sustainable (by my understanding of the word, not how they used it last year to renege on their earlier deals).

Sure maybe they think they can just squeeze IS and suddenly their profits will go up forever, but what is happening now suggests a quick boost to the bottom line with no concern about what happens in the longer term future. That to me suggests a sale, some sort of pump and dump strategy.

I have no idea what H&F, Getty, or IS are really thinking or planning. I wish I did. This is just my take on what I have seen.

Hopefully if they are sold, the new owners have a more realistic idea of what is sustainable both for them and for us. (I can dream, can't I?)
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: jen on April 10, 2011, 10:44
I would like to believe that anyone who buys the company would do their research first.  I hardly doubt any buyer is just going to say "this number is bigger than this number, I'll take it!!!"

Anyway, this is how rumors get started.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: jbarber873 on April 10, 2011, 12:00
   One of the reasons private capital buys a public company is that actions do not have to be reported quarterly for shareholders and competitors to see. Most private hedge funds believe that they have the expertise to streamline and turn around management. In this case, the buyers seem to have put a lot of faith in the present management, and I'm sure they can't be happy with the results, hence the pressure to get the numbers up, no matter what. Any possible private capital buyer would have to feel that they could throw out old management and do better with a new team. While many here might think that is a great possibility, I doubt that there is much in the way of a talent pool to take over from the present management. I can't think of anyone, not that I have given it much thought. The management of Getty was brought down by a sea change in the rights managed business, and that can't be turned back. To me, that leaves an IPO, on the theory that retail investors will just look at a stream of rising numbers, and see happy days ahead. Once the present owners cash out, they could care less what happens 3 quarters down the road. We're in a rising bull market, tech companies are hot, and the low returns on bonds make the stock market the only place to reach for yield. It's the perfect time.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: donding on April 10, 2011, 12:39
   One of the reasons private capital buys a public company is that actions do not have to be reported quarterly for shareholders and competitors to see. Most private hedge funds believe that they have the expertise to streamline and turn around management. In this case, the buyers seem to have put a lot of faith in the present management, and I'm sure they can't be happy with the results, hence the pressure to get the numbers up, no matter what. Any possible private capital buyer would have to feel that they could throw out old management and do better with a new team. While many here might think that is a great possibility, I doubt that there is much in the way of a talent pool to take over from the present management. I can't think of anyone, not that I have given it much thought. The management of Getty was brought down by a sea change in the rights managed business, and that can't be turned back. To me, that leaves an IPO, on the theory that retail investors will just look at a stream of rising numbers, and see happy days ahead. Once the present owners cash out, they could care less what happens 3 quarters down the road. We're in a rising bull market, tech companies are hot, and the low returns on bonds make the stock market the only place to reach for yield. It's the perfect time.

Exactly what I was going to say. H&F invested in a company to turn around in three years and they could care less who's toes they step on...all they want is the profit from their investment. They would have no reason to hold on to it...cash out ...make their profit and on to the next investment, that's how these companies work.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: Sadstock on April 10, 2011, 16:43
Seems to me H&F basically sold Getty last fall.  They could not find a buyer or pull off an IPO so "Hellman & Friedman is paying itself $500 million after borrowing $1.3 billion for portfolio company Getty Images."
http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2010/11/03/short-memories-finance-private-equity-payouts-2/ (http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2010/11/03/short-memories-finance-private-equity-payouts-2/)]

Credit to jsnover for posting this originally.
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch/msg194494/#msg194494 (http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch/msg194494/#msg194494)

So if I'm reading this correctly, H&F borrowed $1.3 billion backed by Getty's assets, which would show up on the Getty balance sheet making it too ugly to pull off an IPO or sell.  

Now Getty needs as much cash flow as it can get to pay off the bonds, so it decides we are unsustainable.  Getty's income before interest has to be way less then $1.3 billion per year, so they will really struggle for a number of years to pay this off.  If they can't, the bond holders take the company, but H&F keeps the $500 million
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: donding on April 10, 2011, 17:06
Seems to me H&F basically sold Getty last fall.  They could not find a buyer or pull off an IPO so "Hellman & Friedman is paying itself $500 million after borrowing $1.3 billion for portfolio company Getty Images."
[url]http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2010/11/03/short-memories-finance-private-equity-payouts-2/[/url] ([url]http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2010/11/03/short-memories-finance-private-equity-payouts-2/[/url])]

Credit to jsnover for posting this originally.
[url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch/msg194494/#msg194494[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch/msg194494/#msg194494[/url])

So if I'm reading this correctly, H&F borrowed $1.3 billion backed by Getty's assets, which would show up on the Getty balance sheet making it too ugly to pull off an IPO or sell.  

Now Getty needs as much cash flow as it can get to pay off the bonds, so it decides we are unsustainable.  Getty's income before interest has to be way less then $1.3 billion per year, so they will really struggle for a number of years to pay this off.  If they can't, the bond holders take the company, but H&F keeps the $500 million


 I don't know how those big boys operate but I know when we had our corporation dividends were payed out quarterly. If that is how they do...which is more than likely the case....at 500 million a quarter, that's 2 billion a year. At three years that's 6 billion dollars they collected in dividends. Dividends are usually calculated on profits. Don't know if that is the case here but if they sell it's pure profit on their part.

Edit...thanks for the link also...that was a nice read.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: jbarber873 on April 10, 2011, 18:04
Seems to me H&F basically sold Getty last fall.  They could not find a buyer or pull off an IPO so "Hellman & Friedman is paying itself $500 million after borrowing $1.3 billion for portfolio company Getty Images."
[url]http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2010/11/03/short-memories-finance-private-equity-payouts-2/[/url] ([url]http://blogs.reuters.com/columns/2010/11/03/short-memories-finance-private-equity-payouts-2/[/url])]

Credit to jsnover for posting this originally.
[url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch/msg194494/#msg194494[/url] ([url]http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/photos-from-gettyimages-direct-to-thinkstock-ouch/msg194494/#msg194494[/url])

So if I'm reading this correctly, H&F borrowed $1.3 billion backed by Getty's assets, which would show up on the Getty balance sheet making it too ugly to pull off an IPO or sell.  

Now Getty needs as much cash flow as it can get to pay off the bonds, so it decides we are unsustainable.  Getty's income before interest has to be way less then $1.3 billion per year, so they will really struggle for a number of years to pay this off.  If they can't, the bond holders take the company, but H&F keeps the $500 million


     Wow. I didn't see that. Great info! It's the greater fool theory as applied to the bond market. These are ,of course , the same geniuses that packaged subprime loans into triple A bonds a few years ago. It's hard to believe that someone would buy these bonds, even at more than 400 basis points over libor. Now, instead of just keeping the original buyers happy, they have to service the debt. The one good aspect of this is that bond buyers are very quick to liquidate a company and get what they can when things go bad. Istock without the Getty baggage might be the most valuable asset, and would then not be called upon the keep the dead heap of Getty alive. Hard to believe this was the best option for H&F. After all, they paid over 2 billion for Getty, and are only able to pull out $500 million. Things must be worse than they appear.
Title: Re: Entire threads disappearing?
Post by: leaf on April 11, 2011, 06:13
Yeah, it is the same tool that takes out a large number of swear and vulgar words.

IS doesn't work because it is also used for the word is... like, "is that a cat", I suppose the work around would be making it case sensitive, but I haven't bothered yet.
ISP also stands for Internet Service Provider which is used here from time to time.