The whole point of being owned by private equity is so you do NOT have to open your books. If bruce would have taken IS public, we would know exactly what the execs are making and how their cash flow looks like.

I think you would find that Istock is making heaps of money but it has been chosen to offset reductions across the rest of the Getty business.

Having said that I don't care, you don't eye gouge the golden goose to prop up reductions in sales in other areas. 80% is already enough commission.

So seeing istocks financial statements would make me more angry in this grab for cash.

I don't think it's a question of how much they are making, but where are they spending it all if they need more?

They don't need! 10M $ houses

I don't trust them any more, so I probably wouldn't believe their statements.

I think it would have a detrimental effect - people would see that profit is increasing, and would thus question the decision to lower commission rates even more vehemently.

They're making a change not because of profit, but because of profit margin. I think TPTB want to see this increased, and the only way to do it is to reduce commissions. Reducing the commissions of "unserious" exclusives is acceptable, as is lowering the nonexclusive commission rate. To management's way of thinking, the "serious" exclusive contributor is not going to see a reduction in income (and might even see an increase), which makes them appear even better at what they do best: provide exclusive content to the microstock marketplace.

Completely unrelated, but I thought this would come about last year, and made the jump to exclusivity sooner than I originally planned - I was afraid that the commission bar would be raised, and by waiting too long I'd miss it. Good on me that I didn't.

I think it would have a detrimental effect - people would see that profit is increasing, and would thus question the decision to lower commission rates even more vehemently.

They're making a change not because of profit, but because of profit margin. I think TPTB want to see this increased, and the only way to do it is to reduce commissions. Reducing the commissions of "unserious" exclusives is acceptable, as is lowering the nonexclusive commission rate. To management's way of thinking, the "serious" exclusive contributor is not going to see a reduction in income (and might even see an increase), which makes them appear even better at what they do best: provide exclusive content to the microstock marketplace.

Completely unrelated, but I thought this would come about last year, and made the jump to exclusivity sooner than I originally planned - I was afraid that the commission bar would be raised, and by waiting too long I'd miss it. Good on me that I didn't.

Don't you think that they will find it harder with so many of us no longer uploading new images?  They have exclusive content but the other sites have millions of images they don't at better prices and they pay higher commissions.  I still feel they have made a big mistake here, losing a lot of their contributors and buyers.

Disclosing their financial statements won't make a difference.  The result will show that they're either greedy *insult removed* or inefficient.  Either result will lead to people giving them the flick.  IS has screwed themselves Royally.

Yep.

Thanks for the replies.  Just wondering how everyone felt.

And yes, I'm in banking so I know all about how things are manipulated.  Can see it all the time.