Author Topic: H&F buying Internet Brands owners of Model Mayhem (Read 9591 times)

NancyCWalker · « **on:** September 20, 2010, 20:53 »

The press release is here.

Hellman & Friedman, owners of Getty, iStock and Thinkstock announce plan to buy Internet Brands, which runs Model Mayhem. http://ow.ly/2HdSH

disorderly · « **Reply #1 on:** September 20, 2010, 21:14 »

This can't be good.

donding · « **Reply #2 on:** September 20, 2010, 21:28 »

Now that is interesting. Thanks for posting.
That part I found most interesting is this "Internet Brands, Inc. (NASDAQ: INET) is a unique and leading Internet media company. The company owns and operates more than 100 websites that are leaders in their vertical markets."...

then this "The vast majority of these sites have very strong community participation."

Wonder how long that will last??

Graffoto · « **Reply #3 on:** September 20, 2010, 22:15 »

OK, the following is purely conjecture on my part:

They will now be requiring paid membership for all photographers.

Models will be free, but limited to two images in their profile unless they are paid subscribers.
Free members will get one message per week.
Paid Sliver subscribers will get to send and receive 25 messages a month.
Paid Gold will get 35 messages per and Black Diamond members will get 40 messages (45 if they are special).

The goal posts will be changed every year so that you will never be able to budget properly for next years expenses.

Feel free to add to this list.

Jo Ann Snover · « **Reply #4 on:** September 20, 2010, 22:19 »

I guess their stellar success in managing the community at a crowdsourcing site they already own led them to expand to another one

I don't use Model Mayhem, but if I did, I'd start wearing one of those bike helmets with a rear view mirror to avoid being taken by surprise by the new owner's "improvements"...

SNP · « **Reply #5 on:** September 20, 2010, 22:22 »

I'm glad someone bought model mayhem. for all its traffic, it is a terrible website. hopefully now they'll have some standards, rather than every model posing naked to prove they can be sexy. do we really still live in an era where young models think they have to represent themselves as sleazy to get ahead? I don't use MM anymore, found word of mouth was a better way to get dependable models. I pay my models too, which helps, modest hourly wage + prints.

Graffoto · « **Reply #6 on:** September 20, 2010, 22:27 »

Quote from: hawk_eye on September 20, 2010, 22:22

I'm glad someone bought model mayhem. for all its traffic, it is a terrible website. hopefully now they'll have some standards, rather than every model posing naked to prove they can be sexy. do we really still live in an era where young models think they have to represent themselves as sleazy to get ahead? I don't use MM anymore, found word of mouth was a better way to get dependable models. I pay my models too, which helps, modest hourly wage + prints.

While I don't shoot nudes and I generally won't use those particular models.... I do understand why the women pose this way.
A whole lot of them a have a fantasy of posing for playboy or other ladmags. And frankly the ones that pose nude are more likely to get paid gigs than those that do not.

Sorry for going off topic so much. Just my $0.02

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program...

Randy McKown · « **Reply #7 on:** September 20, 2010, 22:36 »

Quote from: hawk_eye on September 20, 2010, 22:22

I'm glad someone bought model mayhem. for all its traffic, it is a terrible website. hopefully now they'll have some standards, rather than every model posing naked to prove they can be sexy. do we really still live in an era where young models think they have to represent themselves as sleazy to get ahead? I don't use MM anymore, found word of mouth was a better way to get dependable models. I pay my models too, which helps, modest hourly wage + prints.

Why do you think they do it? Because of the over population of newbies who go buy a cheapo digital rebel and suddenly think they are pro fashion photographers yet offer TFCDs cuz nobody will pay them and let's not forget all the blow hards who boost their ego with BS like "I've shot for playboy." no you took a crap snapshot that ended up in their freebie POTD section plus you got the descent photogs who claim the same but are really just praying they will get the right girl out of her clothes and get the PB finders fee .. then you got the straight up pervs.
At our studio we have done tons of portfolio sessions .. some for stock but mostly as paid sessions (we dont pay models they pay us) and we constantly hear "I was told if I wanted to make it in the biz that was part of it." The photographers are behind the sleeze factor not the models.

SNP · « **Reply #8 on:** September 20, 2010, 22:37 »

^ I agree with that. I think the photographers are to blame for a lot of that mentality. another reason I don't want to be a part of MM. I've seen some pretty sleazy photographer comments on that site. I got tired of clone stamping out piercings and tattoos.....and seeing young people taking that approach to selling themselves, no thanks. there are a lot of professional models, even beginner models who are more grounded and dependable. agencies will often work with you for a reduced fee too if you provide headshots etc. but Im off topic too. apologies to the OP. I guess a topic for another thread.

leaf · « **Reply #9 on:** September 21, 2010, 03:29 »

Quote from: hawk_eye on September 20, 2010, 22:37

^ I agree with that. I think the photographers are to blame for a lot of that mentality. another reason I don't want to be a part of MM. I've seen some pretty sleazy photographer comments on that site. I got tired of clone stamping out piercings and tattoos.....and seeing young people taking that approach to selling themselves, no thanks. there are a lot of professional models, even beginner models who are more grounded and dependable. agencies will often work with you for a reduced fee too if you provide headshots etc. but Im off topic too. apologies to the OP. I guess a topic for another thread.

here is another thread discussing models
http://www.microstockgroup.com/general-stock-discussion/where-do-you-find-stock-photography-models/

NancyCWalker · « **Reply #10 on:** September 21, 2010, 06:47 »

MM is a social gathering place for models, photogrpahers, MUA and anyone else that is relevant to that world. It's a lot more like this site then a model agency. No one is paid, Gatekeepers volunteer to make sure that profiles meet the minimum requirements and Moderators volunteer to make sure the forums don't get to out of control and that those who violate the rules are tossed.

It was first started so that models who couldn't get into an agency could have a place to advertise.

I would just hate to see the only free modeling site, all the others require a membership fee, go the way of IS because big business decided it needed more profit. In the interest of full disclosure I'm a GK there.

gostwyck · « **Reply #11 on:** September 21, 2010, 07:18 »

Quote from: hawk_eye on September 20, 2010, 22:22

I'm glad someone bought model mayhem. for all its traffic, it is a terrible website. hopefully now they'll have some standards, rather than every model posing naked to prove they can be sexy. do we really still live in an era where young models think they have to represent themselves as sleazy to get ahead? I don't use MM anymore, found word of mouth was a better way to get dependable models. I pay my models too, which helps, modest hourly wage + prints.

What on earth has naked models got to do with MM in particular or indeed model/photographer websites in general? I'd agree MM isn't much of a website but then I don't really understand how they generate the income to run it let alone improve it. It is what it is. It's been around for a long time, generated a lot of work for its members and therefore has to be considered a notable success. I don't see it much different to OMP other than OMP is obviously more sophisticated but simply awful to navigate.

If I search for available models in my area on either MM or OMP then it is obvious that each model has their own reasons for doing what they're doing and they're all different. Some of the kit-off 'models' are clearly intent on providing a service to a particular market, not dissimilar to be honest to that of lap dancing bars. That's ok. There's a market for it, it's perfectly legal and many people enjoy participating or earning from it.

As it happens many of the top models make most of their money posing nude. They tend to be incredibly beautiful, have fantastic bodies and are most often very professional indeed. They work hard at diet and exercise, know how to pose, take direction well, suggest their own ideas for the shoot and can usually do their own hair/MU. If they're good enough they get flown around the world, live a fairly glamorous lifestyle and earn decent money.

Why be so judgemental about how others choose to live their lives?

Microbius · « **Reply #12 on:** September 21, 2010, 07:20 »

Quote from: Randy McKown on September 20, 2010, 22:36

Quote from: hawk_eye on September 20, 2010, 22:22
I'm glad someone bought model mayhem. for all its traffic, it is a terrible website. hopefully now they'll have some standards, rather than every model posing naked to prove they can be sexy. do we really still live in an era where young models think they have to represent themselves as sleazy to get ahead? I don't use MM anymore, found word of mouth was a better way to get dependable models. I pay my models too, which helps, modest hourly wage + prints.

Why do you think they do it? Because of the over population of newbies who go buy a cheapo digital rebel and suddenly think they are pro fashion photographers yet offer TFCDs cuz nobody will pay them and let's not forget all the blow hards who boost their ego with BS like "I've shot for playboy." no you took a crap snapshot that ended up in their freebie POTD section plus you got the descent photogs who claim the same but are really just praying they will get the right girl out of her clothes and get the PB finders fee .. then you got the straight up pervs.
At our studio we have done tons of portfolio sessions .. some for stock but mostly as paid sessions (we dont pay models they pay us) and we constantly hear "I was told if I wanted to make it in the biz that was part of it." The photographers are behind the sleeze factor not the models.

Yeah I remember when one of the micro photogs that's always on the SS forum (if I say he is the archetypal volume over quality shooter you'll know who I mean) got caught writing the most outrageously vile misogynistic stuff on MM claiming he was a world renowned industry leader so had the right to hurl abuse at young girls.

FD · « **Reply #13 on:** September 22, 2010, 10:41 »

Quote from: Randy McKown on September 20, 2010, 22:36

The photographers are behind the sleeze factor not the models.

The "photographers" without film in their camera do exist. I had to remove "model photography" from my business card because I grew tired of the cheesy grins I got when they read it.

Randy McKown · « **Reply #14 on:** September 22, 2010, 21:40 »

Quote from: FD-regular on September 22, 2010, 10:41

Quote from: Randy McKown on September 20, 2010, 22:36
The photographers are behind the sleeze factor not the models.
The "photographers" without film in their camera do exist. I had to remove "model photography" from my business card because I grew tired of the cheesy grins I got when they read it.

Yeah I don't include model photography in one single bit of our studio marketing .. no cards no galleries no nothing. My thoughts are if a model looks at our portrait website and can't figure out to just give us a call then chances are they can't afford us anyway .. but normally when they do call they still can't afford us so that works out pretty good for me. LMAO

SNP · « **Reply #15 on:** September 22, 2010, 23:30 »

Quote from: gostwyck on September 21, 2010, 07:18

Why be so judgemental about how others choose to live their lives?

dude, it's almost laughable this question came from you...

I care about how young people are treated in our industry, absolutely I do. I've heard absolute horror stories about how models have been treated by photographers. a few of us we were having a conversation about MM, the site, the business around the site.....why do you have to be such a troll, why comment if you don't like the conversation?....why be so judgmental about how others choose to live their lives?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: H&F buying Internet Brands owners of Model Mayhem (Read 9591 times)

NancyCWalker

disorderly

donding

Graffoto

Jo Ann Snover

SNP

Graffoto

Randy McKown

SNP

leaf

NancyCWalker

gostwyck

Microbius

FD

Randy McKown

SNP

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors